[anamax]

> it would be highly inefficient to have multiple garbage pickup companies vying for the business of each individual resident.

Why the assumption that that's the only way to have multiple garbage companies?

If something is actually too inefficient, the costs will stop them and they'll come up with a plan that is "efficient enough".

> Past experience with private fire engine companies

Is irrelevant because the business model is completely different.

Also, that experience is overstated by folks pushing a monolithic model. History is written by the victors.

[anigbrowl]

Fine, show me somewhere that doesn't use a tender-contract model.

If something is actually too inefficient, the costs will stop them and they'll come up with a plan that is "efficient enough".

Why do you think companies seek monopoly concessions, or that distributors seek same from producers in the private marketplace? That's what the current litigation over trash disposal contracts in Sf turns upon: http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/2011/07/san-franciscos-garba...

Meanwhile, other approaches to competition in the garbage industry have historically proved problematic: http://www.manhattan-institute.org/html/cb_7.htm http://clevelandmob.com/warofwaste.html http://www.fbi.gov/news/stories/2008/november/galante_110408

[anamax]

> Fine, show me somewhere that doesn't use a tender-contract model.

That's a different issue. Politics....

>> If something is actually too inefficient, the costs will stop them and they'll come up with a plan that is "efficient enough".

> Why do you think companies seek monopoly concessions, or that distributors seek same from producers in the private marketplace?

To avoid competition. Of course that question isn't related to the statement quoted.

Yes, some garbage companies are/were mobbed up. Since some of them had city franchises, it's unclear why you'd bring that up. In any event, it's as irrelevant as the fact that the mob engages in other biz.