How is this decision to be made? The reality of the matter, is that governments are never in a position to compare societal costs and benefits in the way an individual might weigh personal costs and benefits. Even putting to the side the touchy subject of interpersonal utility comparisons, there is the knowledge problem. For government to reliably improve "social utility" to be above and beyond that of the natural market order, it would have to have a stunning degree of information that is simply not realistic or workable. Outside of the most extreme cases, it requires a giant leap of faith.
The problem with that argument is that the individual is doing just that; weighing
personal costs and benefits which is where my fundamental qualm lies with extreme libertarianism; it begins from the standpoint that we are all unconnected individuals which is simply not the case. While I do believe in the individual, I also believe that each and every individual one of us makes up a collective. I think John Donne put it best in the following passage:
'No man is an Iland, intire of itselfe; every man is a peece of the Continent, a part of the maine; if a Clod bee washed away by the Sea, Europe is the lesse, as well as if a Promontorie were, as well as if a Manor of thy friends or of thine owne were; any mans death diminishes me, because I am involved in Mankinde; And therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; It tolls for thee.'
Certainly the individual has to think about personal costs and benefits, but I would argue that under many circumstances an individual thinks on a very short term level (arguably governments do too) and thus is unlikely to consider personal long term benefits derived from the short and longer term benefits to the community.
Governments do not have perfect knowledge, but nor do individuals; under some circumstances it is my view that it is right and proper for the government to intervene and I very much hope that what Bush has done goes a long way towards tackling the problem although I worry - as JSojourner does - that present policy initiatives take a misguided view both on the left and the right. My position on this actually changed relatively recently following a discussion with an academic supervisor who specialises in African history. She told me that during one of her frequent trips to Tanzania she discussed the issue with someone who worked in the field. He told her that one of the problems was that many who sold/distributed condoms had no qualms about accepting 'dodgy' shipments that could likely contain defective ones and simply handing them out or selling them and if the people taking these are under the impression that they are protected because they are using condoms then they could be gravely mistaken and gravely endangered. I think what is needed here is a fundamental rethink of policy and I hope that some of this money goes towards that.
