[scientator]

I was agreeing with you up until trash pick-up, which I think is a bad example, because there are obvious reasons why it makes sense to have the city contract with one company for that service, rather than having multiple companies with multiple dump sites and different fleets of trucks roaming the city. And if you give people the option to not pay for trash pick-up, that's just opening the door to having people pile up trash around their houses and yards. You know it would happen. So yeah, I don't think trash pick-up is an example of regulatory capture like your other examples.

[dlcarrier]

I really don't understand why you would think that, although I have access to more information, so what seems obvious to me may not be obvious to others.

Only a few of the largest cities in the county have trash-collection service, (with the largest having a cheap city-owned trash-collection service) so in the smaller cities and most unincorporated areas there is no service. Service is only mandatory where it is available, so in much of the county service isn't mandatory. The dump is run by the county, with multiple transfer stations to cover areas far from the dump, and anyone can take their own trash there and pay by volume. The trash collection services take trash to the same locations.

The county has regulations against unsightly and dangerous property conditions that if violated can lead to fees, and unpaid fees will lead to liens. They cover general refuse, but most of them are focused on problems that trash service doesn't affect, like fire-prone vegetation, abandoned vehicles and buildings, and large tanks and containers, as these are more of a problem than general refuse. Where I live It's also legal to burn trash, when there isn't a fire risk or excess heat, although some cities in the county do prohibit it.

Also, hoarders tend to hoard, and the convenience of trash pickup service, vs the time for a dump run, isn't likely to make a difference in someone's cleanliness.