I'm not going to argue whether government is better or worse here, but it's actually not uncommon in the agricultural industry for similar kind of action being taken against invasive pests that is led by producers' associations which are private organizations. Including very long term action for example there are cases of land being bought up so as to cease farming activity on it indefinitely to prevent pest spread (e.g., with Panama disease in some places).
Arguably it also should not have depended on generosity or public service to deal with the problem, the land owners should have been fairly compensated.
Not local government, self-government. Local government is still politicians and bureaucrats. Self-government is the exercise of your own political power, private property rights and capabilities and rights as a citizen. These are not limited to ticking some names on a ballot once or twice a year.
> Granted, but who is going to spearhead such an effort?
I suppose this is a rhetorical question, which does not help me understand your point of view. Can you just explain why for example a home insurance industry group (or any of the other interested groups) would not organize to deal with this problem in the absence of government action?
1) Pay for a super expensive termite remediation on someone’s property in hopes that it will guarantee that other customers’ properties won’t get termites
2) Raise premiums to account for termite infestation risk
3) Deny termite damage claims
There’s only one thing on that list I can’t imagine them doing
I never said I had a crystal ball and could tell you that would happen, or claim that private is better than government (which I assume is what is upsetting people who are reading that into it). Read the post I originally replied to and look at the context.
If you did want to get into government vs private, there are plenty of examples of government failure to deal with introduced and other invasive pest species, not to mention countless examples of large scale collective organization or lack thereof which have been spectacular failures of government incompetence and corruption to the detriment of the public good everywhere you look. Not just in invasive species control failures, but from wars to healthcare to drug policy to homelessness to climate change. So anecdotes won't be enough to demonstrate the case one way or the other, unfortunately.
This is my big takeaway, I know a lot of people are against government projects. But in this case especially, where is the profit motive to fix this problem? I can't see any other solution than long term investment in the long term interest of the country. What other entity could ensure long term commitment to such an unprofitable project?