LogFAQs > #912741033

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, Database 4 ( 07.23.2018-12.31.2018 ), DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear
Topic List
Page List: 1
Topicwhat would happen if hospitals competed like other businesses
Balrog0
11/20/18 12:58:10 PM
#61:


Questionmarktarius posted...
That's actually an argument for "VA for everyone".


how? seriously look at this objectively and without trying to grind that ax. explain yourself for once and be specific instead of using silly analogies.

Questionmarktarius posted...
That's where the bus analogy works: It's cheap, sometimes even free, and available for anyone to use. Most people, however, would rather just use private transportation.
Or, we can attempt to buy everyone Cadillacs. Good luck with that.


but since you insist on talking about things this way, lets extend the analogy

the government subsidizes drivers indirectly by keeping gas taxes low but continuing to increase funding for highways and roads, which causes more and more lanes to be built and maintained using general fund money or bonds. that means you and I are paying for it even if we don't use it.

what you're saying is that, instead of letting poor people have access to a free car, we should give them bus passes. but you're not saying we should do much to change the situation where government spending unfairly biases people to use cars instead of buses, through the financial incentives they give drivers over public transit riders -- think about it, people say public transit systems are failing when farebox collections don't recoup costs, but literally no car has ever recouped the costs of its trip with respect to the public dollars that are necessary to maintain that infrastructure. In other countries, where car drivers pay their costs, people drive less and use public transit more.

But you're not talking about taking away our massive subsidies for drivers, you're just talking about setting up an alternative system for poor people. And you've yet to explain why except through this analogy which I've hopefully now refuted or at least put into doubt.

tangentially, it's crazy to me how easily you 'libertarian' types can switch between 'consumer behavior is a result of bargaining between different parties and represents the least bad trade off from their perspectives' and 'people do this so that means they prefer to do this' without even slowing down to think about the implications of what you just said
---
But to you who are listening I say: Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.
... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List
Page List: 1