Create account

The stable area is a significant part of the service. This is why canceling the service requires you leaving. Staying is opting in. You must opt out.
I don't think running away from the cancer of people advocating systematic theft is moral.
So I don't. How does my staying here validate my being stolen from?
"stable area" is so far removed from the myriad of entitlements the gov redistributes. many people would be happy paying just for that. dont want all the crap gov dreams up.
Ah, that sounds very libertarian. A limited government still needs to collect taxes, just far less. Likely could survive off of just sales tax, and no income tax.
yeah it is ;P lol. sales tax only would be nice. & i wonder how far donations only could go (esp for things like helping the poor but also for defense).
I think defense can not have such uncertainty. I would want him still funded by taxes. Same with thigs like water and sewage. Healthcare and social security as well.
The market provides many things stably. Its not always the same people but the result is the same. Grocery store is a good example. Gov isn’t need to say each store must stock bread.
It happens naturally & there has always been bread at the store whenever I’ve wanted some. Not necessarily the same brand or kind but it’s there.
Not to mention the market provide accountability to these activities. Many gov agencies are incompetent yet their budget keeps increasing
Things that follow market sources should. Supply and demand is a great self regulating system. Not all thigs obey market forces though.
everything caves to market forces sooner or later.
What I mean is that not all things can follow market forces, or be regulated by supply and demand.
“Follow market forces” really just means people respond to price information. If price information is corrupted or obscured (as in healthcare) then yes, market forces do not work.
I think it is the product that is the main problem. Life, or death, often make it an immeasurable problem. Also it is cheaper to prevent, than treat usually.
& market can also spread risk around (insurance) in a way that still discourages reckless behavior (eg smoking)
unlike political solutions that restrict the use of historical data that is "racist" or "sexist" or whatever by current political standards to accurately price insurance
true, though this would bias survival to people who plan, & people who can afford to be reckless (though they would be draining their resources at a faster rate).
The solution though is to return to accurate price information (freer market), not to further obscure price information by adding new rules, laws, and bureaucracy.
That would be helpful at least. There are a lot of ways prices have been obscured over time. I think Americans often pay more for drugs to cover selling them cheaper in poor nations.
& you're right prices can be inelastic (needing treatment for a life-threatening disease). But markets generally create alternatives & competition drives down prices/increases quality
yeah, think that would help the situation a lot but it would be difficult. & US does pay more (is that a patent thing?)
Pharmaceutical companies give away a lot of parasite drugs to third world nations for free. Some of the cheaper drugs are to compete with generic versions though. Some are offset price
what is a parasite drug?
oh you mean drugs to literally treat parasites?
Yes. Parasite are a huge problem in some developing nations.