> A post ignoring the examples I gave immediately appears Not sure what you mean. Am I supposed to only reply if I disagree? Just because I did't express dis

> A post ignoring the examples I gave immediately appears Not sure what you mean. Am I supposed to only reply if I disagree? Just because I did't express disagreement with your examples doesn't mean I didn't read them. Your question that summarized the examples was: "Why is it that folks think that paying for a product somehow fixes this?" My answer was: "Because that is a necessary condition (although not sufficient)." Your examples focused IMHO too much on the "not sufficient" part, so I added the missing counterpart ("but necessary!"). I do not disagree with you at all, my intend was just to add a missing piece to your argument. Moreover, I did not say that "demand sanity" merely means voting with your wallet. It also means demanding proper laws from your politicians.