Re: spoilsport!

You gotta dig those road lanes reserved just for the rich sponsors, as it proves qtns2di4's contention that the free market add's up to...well, freedom for all!

Straw man. Straw dinosaur, even, so big it is!

First of all, I do not regard motorized transportation as a right.

Second, I do not regard road lanes as a right either, or as an equivalent to a hypothetical right to motorized transportation, either.

Third, if the roads were paid for with public money, then it's an equal right of every member of the public to use them - not because they have a "right" to a lane, but because they paid for it. Notice that I say "every member of the public". That means that if I want to walk my toddler and my dog in it, I have the right to, because I paid for it. Not just car owners or drivers. I am surprized you did not remember this, as I have argued this with both you and Markaba regarding the perennial "would you let a toddler walk into a road?" - yes, the toddler does not have any less right to use the road than a motorized vehicle's driver does.

Fourth, if the roads were paid for with private money from X, then X has the right to limit access for any reasons they think are fit, including such possibly absurd reasons as being a crony to the IOC.

Fifth and final; a true free market in road lanes would mean that any number of competitors could build any number of road lanes they wanted (uncheck), and that they could sell the access to the highest bidder(s) as they go, instead of setting special privileges not based on a free bidding / pricing process (uncheck). Essentially, if I cannot build a road myself to bypass this inconvenience; or if I cannot pay my way to use the IOC lanes, then no, that's not free market, period.