It occurs to me that 3rd places in the old world may have existed in large part due to market inefficiencies. A combination of local monopolies and low overhead. Some element of love of the game, much like OS software, might have also played into the ownership of tea houses and outdoor cafes.
But what are we to do in our modern much more efficient real estate and beverage service markets?
Publicly subsidize 3rd places?
I'm having a hard time comping up with a libertarian argument for public subsidies of public spaces. I happen to think bridges are better when privately funded, like the Millau Viaduct http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millau_Viaduct
But that's because the return on investment with bridges is easy to collect.
3rd spaces however could be crucial to community building, thereby acting as a fertilizer for increased business activity and possibly even as a way to reduce crime rates.
But what are we to do in our modern much more efficient real estate and beverage service markets?
Publicly subsidize 3rd places?
I'm having a hard time comping up with a libertarian argument for public subsidies of public spaces. I happen to think bridges are better when privately funded, like the Millau Viaduct http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millau_Viaduct
But that's because the return on investment with bridges is easy to collect.
3rd spaces however could be crucial to community building, thereby acting as a fertilizer for increased business activity and possibly even as a way to reduce crime rates.
But those benefits are difficult to charge for.