"1. Introduction
The theft of objects from cars has been on the rise and has proven to be pervasive, which has triggered anxiety among the citizens and societal discontent with the municipal government´s inactivity. In this paper, the possibility of government intervention through the provision of a guarded parking facility is scrutinized in order to evaluate the microeconomic ramifications of the proposal.
The analysis of the proposal is four-fold: Firstly, the rationale for government intervention is discussed; secondly, the welfare consequences are evaluated; thirdly, indirect effects of government intervention are deliberated; and fourthly, an alternative measure and its impacts are postulated.
Throughout, it is argued that a government-run and subsidized facility for guarded car parking is an inexpedient solution to the abovementioned problem.

2. Rationale for government intervention
There are two primary justifications for government intervention into the free market in order to increase societal welfare:
a) The free market fails to provide an optimal outcome both for society and the individuals.
b) Individuals themselves are unable to infer and value the possible benefits and drawbacks of their actions; this includes their unwillingness to reveal their true preferences which then results in the underprovision of public goods (guarded parking places). (Rosen, Gayer, 2010)
Hence, any proposal by the municipality should be adopted if and only if a) no company or individual would find it profitable to operate a guarded parking facility or b) citizens fail to demonstrate their preferences and needs which, however, “need” to be taken care of.
Ultimately, a government has such an obligation, stemming from its role, to provide an either partially or fully subsidized public good, if and only if such a policy increases the living standards of the majority of the population while leaving nobody significantly worse off."

PRÁCE BYLA UVOLNĚNA BEZ NÁROKU NA HONORÁŘ