4 ms·

I believe the opposite, it's just as fair as when I pay for public healthcare despite being "never sick", when I pay for unemployment compensation despite not n

by nolok 8y ago

I believe the opposite, it's just as fair as when I pay for public healthcare despite being "never sick", when I pay for unemployment compensation despite not needing it, or when I pay for public school despite not having kids. It makes society better because it means less congestions on the street and less pollution, it makes it fairer for those that don't have a choice (because they're too far from work to bike or walk, because their city does not have have the right bike lanes, etc ...), it's the definition of what taxes should be for in a developped society, imho. I'm happy to pay higher taxes for it, despite not needing it since I work remotely and have most place I go to within walking distance by living in city center.

shrewduser 8y ago
Healthcare and unemployment act more like insurance than a service though I don't entirely disagree I just think they're not great comparisons.
- nolok 8y ago
  Ability to move around to (possible/prospective) jobs locations is a big factor in unemployment. Free public transport means losing my ability to pay for my car doesn't mean I lose the ability to go more than a couple of miles away from my house. Not that the article here is for kids (and in particular for Paris) so my comparisons is not that great I admit but still, living in a rural area I've spent my entire teenage decade dependant on public transport to go to the school my parent wanted for me, to go to "the city" see my friends/visit places/go to the mediatheque where they had computers (!!!), and along with the food cost at school it was a major expense for my parents, that they would have had to cut on if one of them was unlucky and lost his or her job. So it still rings very true to me. But again, given it's about Paris, my exemple is not that great. You probably realized I would probably be ok for it country wide though.
  - systemtest 8y ago
    In a pure economy, a job that is located in a place that is expensive to reach will cease to exist or pay enough to make the commute worth it.
    - nolok 8y ago
      If there any country where that actually works properly though ? We might approach it in some localised places but we're not reaching it overall. And then add that France is a democracy that's centralized like a dictatorship ...

by nolok 8y ago

shrewduser 8y ago

Healthcare and unemployment act more like insurance than a service though I don't entirely disagree I just think they're not great comparisons.

nolok 8y ago
Ability to move around to (possible/prospective) jobs locations is a big factor in unemployment. Free public transport means losing my ability to pay for my car doesn't mean I lose the ability to go more than a couple of miles away from my house. Not that the article here is for kids (and in particular for Paris) so my comparisons is not that great I admit but still, living in a rural area I've spent my entire teenage decade dependant on public transport to go to the school my parent wanted for me, to go to "the city" see my friends/visit places/go to the mediatheque where they had computers (!!!), and along with the food cost at school it was a major expense for my parents, that they would have had to cut on if one of them was unlucky and lost his or her job. So it still rings very true to me. But again, given it's about Paris, my exemple is not that great. You probably realized I would probably be ok for it country wide though.
- systemtest 8y ago
  In a pure economy, a job that is located in a place that is expensive to reach will cease to exist or pay enough to make the commute worth it.
  - nolok 8y ago
    If there any country where that actually works properly though ? We might approach it in some localised places but we're not reaching it overall. And then add that France is a democracy that's centralized like a dictatorship ...