|
|
COMMENTS:
The only accurate thing you have written here is "perhaps I am simply tricking myself..." Bullseye! Fortunately, you're not tricking the rest of us. Most of us, anyway.
Look, my young friend Law number one of the universe is: there's nothing for free. SOMEONE has to pay for any given product or service, even if it's not the person receiving
it. Who shall that someone be? The government? Government can only give to someone what it first takes away from someone else, and it can take things only by force or the threat thereof. And you'd be amazed how quickly the country will run out of those "someone elses". What you propose is the economic equivalent of perpetual motion, and it won't work for the same reason: because it's impossible to get something for nothing.
Well if taxes are going to maintain the system, then everybody is paying for it, neal! Perhaps one of the reasons the world is in the state its in is because everything has a price! Ideologically a sound idea and what a great learning tool for people who want to learn the how!
exactly my thoughts quirk...nail on the head.
The internet was meant to be free to society, not filled with trademarks and patents.
Yes - otherwise, we're in danger of superimposing and reinforcing 'intelligence classes' i.e. social bands with different levels of access to information, on top of the current injustices of life.
And re: Neal_Anderthal:
'there's nothing for free' may be the number 1 rule of Capitalism, but certainly not of the Universe. There was a time before money, you know. Imagine that!
chestercopperpot, now you are scaling back your ambitions, saying that only the internet should be "free". In your ballot you also mentioned "power, food and clothing" among the things that should also be "free", so that gave me the right to also mention those things in showing why they are NOT free, but paid for. Are you now saying you wish to refer only to the internet? If so then come right out and say so.
The internet is currently free, in the same way that television is free: it's actually not. As I said, SOMEONE has to pay for it. In both cases it's the advertisers And the advertisers pass on the cost in the form of prices which are ultimately paid by some of the TV and internet users. If you think about it you will come to understand what I said with the words "nothing is free".
Now, keithsheen: Ask any competent scientist, and he'll tell you that "Nothing is free" IS a law of physics. But he'll phrase it in a more erudite and elegantly detailed way than I, a non-scientist, am capable of. He'll use such terms as "Thermodynamics" "conservation of energy" but the underlying gist of it, in layman's terms, is this. You can't get something in nature, which is why perpetual motion machines never work, at least not without an infusion of energy from an outside source. And you can't get something for nothing in economics, either, which is why communism and socialism never work, without an infusion of energy from an outside source, which will always be capitalism. I stand by this analogy as accurate.
Now, Quirk99: Yes, we currently pay taxes, and excessive ones in my opinion, but that's irrelevant to this debate, because chester proposed being taxed to provide everyone with EVERYTHING they want, at the expense of someone else, of course. My questions: Once people know they can whatever they want for the asking - will they ever STOP asking? How do you stop their request for the "free" stuff from becoming infinite, given that THEY don't have to pay anything? And what will you do when we run out of those long-suffering "someone elses" who DO pay for it, while getting nothing themselves? As we ineveitably will, because, my friend, You truly CAN'T get something for nothing.
thats me ;-))
Also, just so youll know im not trying get something for nothing...i realise it would cost something. That is why i would make it self maintaining, my belief is that because it would be maintained by the city via tax dallors payed by citizens of the city, which are useing the service they would approve of it becuase its like the roads, which they actually use, its not just another phony tax increase its something which the people actually benefit from. Give & take.
Chester, the above comment was mine. I timed out.
;-) haha..cutting out the middle man, well i like the sound of that.
|
|
