Let's not forget the social effects of the class system. What better way to destroy social cohesiveness than this? Its similar to public schools without uniforms.<p>Within my rural, southern public school system,I was clearly marked out in the southern caste system as "white trash" in school because I wore $15 canvas sneakers rather than $60 name-brand shoes, jeans and t-shirt rather than polo shirt and khakis, etc.<p>In the adult world, the caste system still exists in a rather potent form: dating. If you are a man who is marked out in some way as earning less, you will get significantly less attention from women in general. The OKCupid data has confirmed this effect for men over the age of 23, and it is a very potent one.
The author Rory Sutherland is vice-chairman of Ogilvy Group UK.<p>I don't think we want the ad guys determining the pricing structure for airlines. Anyway, the reason for the wacky pricing on airfares is not some sort of implicit agreement to be socialistic about it. It's because the fixed costs associated with the flight are so high. It costs virtually nothing to add another person to the flight. Airline fares are a dance between filling up the flight while maximizing the average fare per seat. Price too high and you fly with empty seats. Price to low and you fill up but leave money on the table.
I live in the far North, and recently flew down to Toronto, my first time "leaving" in over a year.<p>Of all the things that struck me about "The world", the number one thing was the "class system" that the airlines tried to impose. At every check-in counter there was a little sign saying economy on the right, business on the left. For the four flights I waited for an eventually got on, I heard the airline announce on the PA, at least 5 times each "Economy stay on the right".<p>I never did see a single person line up and get on from the "left" line.<p>It occurred to me, the point of separating the lines was not so that the business passengers would have a faster/better experience, it was merely used to remind the rest of us exactly where we sit on the class ladder: The Bottom.
The author is clearly confused about libertarianism - as a libertarian, the points he's making are very 'no duh', and the characterization of the 747 as 'socialist' is odd (libertarians advocate for this sort of redistribution - and even less <i>materially mutual</i> beneficial redistribution - i.e. charity - all the time) but aside from his ham-fistedness about 'voluntary redistribution', it's a very eloquent and well-done article. I don't know about thrones in school busses, though.
The Paris metro did have 1st and 2nd class sections, but ended them in 1991 [1]<p>The London underground did as well, but ended them in 1940 during/because of the war [2]<p>In Paris, it seems that demand fell to non-sustainable levels. This was after enforcement stopped though, which seems like it could be a rather classic example of the free-rider problem!<p>1: <a href="http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1991-05-12/travel/9102110973_1_first-class-second-class-paris-metro" rel="nofollow">http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1991-05-12/travel/9102110...</a><p>2: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Underground_O_and_P_Stock" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Underground_O_and_P_Stoc...</a>
This article conflates the ideas of pure price discrimination (where goods are identical) and premium pricing (where they are not).<p>No one is better at this than the travel industry. Remember that story about a travel website showing higher prices to people with Apple User-Agents? Yup.<p>If a restaurant wants to charge $1,000 for a premium cheeseburger on the off chance some rich person wants to distinguish himself, well, that's weird, but that's capitalism.<p>But if this "software" were to read everyone's mind and calculate exactly how much they are willing to pay for any good at any time, consumers will get fleeced.
The notion that little Johnny needs to sit at the back of the bus on a hard seat while little Sally is upfront ensconced in a tufted, leather wrapped throne is beyond ludicrous. I wasn't sure if the author was was being serious or making some kind of Swiftian satire. There's nothing like reinforcing a centuries old class system to grease the wheels of social cohesion.
The author of the article explains his point clearly, and in a way it makes sense when looked at it from that perspective.<p>I'll offer another, more pessimistic perspective. He assumes that the users paying more will get extra service, while service level for the rest will stay the same. But, it's almost never the case. In practice, the level of service for regular price will just go down, and service providers will start to charge even for something that was free, or available at lower cost before this service differentiation started.
"If the first two carriages in each train cost three times as much as the others but offered free Wi-Fi, and were furnished not with basic seats but with the sumptuousness of an Edwardian-era New Orleans brothel, you could afford to run more trains."<p>You don't have enough trains in your subway? That's strange. It's supposed to be rapid transit isn't it?
> <i>My contention is that it should be possible to devise software which solves this problem: everyone secretly reveals what they would be willing to pay</i><p>Riiiight. And what on earth is going to convince the wealthy folks to type "$100" into the system instead of "$3"?<p>> <i>How can you avoid people gaming the system? The price each parent pays could theoretically be kept confidential, but in reality would not remain so.</i><p>What does that even <i>mean</i>?
The author completely overlooks complementary upgrades for frequent flyers. Frequent flyers are the lifeblood of the industry but not because they pay for a higher class level. They earn the higher class level for free by making many lower class level flights. On domestic flights very few first class passengers are paying extra. International is different but still has a large number of free upgrades (depending on the airline).
In practice, Southwest airlines has one class of passenger. Everyone rides in steerage, but you can pay a little extra to jump at the front of the line and pick your favorite steerage class seat. They're able to operate profitably on a fairly consistent basis, this author is postulating a necessity that does not exist.
<i>"How do you get people with wildly differing willingness or ability to pay to fund some common good other than through redistributive taxation?</i>"
For cases like this why would I want something other than redistributive taxation?<p>By the way, Joel Spolsky has a very good explanation of the mechanisms behind airplane fares, including why you might <i>not</i> want to go this way:
<a href="http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/CamelsandRubberDuckies.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/CamelsandRubberDuckie...</a>
Seems very similar to the way many successful SaaS businesses operate. Charging larger businesses $200/month with big margins makes it viable to provide $20/month 'freelancer' plans with low margins.
I thought the anecdote about 1st class trains in London being socially unacceptable was an interesting cultural anecdote. I've ridden Amtrak in the US both steerage class and first class and no one thought it was overly interesting or revolutionary. Perhaps because it was like an art deco day dream rather than decorated like an "Edwardian-era New Orleans brothel" per the article. Hmm, that gives me an idea about instituting a "mile long train" club... which would be pretty easy to implement in the 1st class cabins, not so easy for steerage.<p>One interesting experience WRT 1st class trains is unlike the authors strange ideas about sitting on spikes in a bus, the primary difference between steerage and 1st class on Amtrak trains was privacy. My own bathroom, my own closed cabin, etc. Same food as everyone else (although it was "free" with the ticket price). Same view out the window, we didn't get there any sooner than anyone else...<p>Oh and the 1st class only lounge in the Chicago station has to be seen to be believed. That alone might be worth the ticket price. Even impatient me, in luxurious enough surroundings, didn't mind waiting an extra hour or so. Its not like any airport waiting room I've ever seen.