14 ms·
I think the American conception here is that if something is not profitable then it suggests the possibility that there is an alternative that provides the same
by ethanwillis 6y ago
I think the American conception here is that if something is not profitable then it suggests the possibility that there is an alternative that provides the same utility but more efficiently.
- ltbarcly3 6y agoI think the conception here is that if you are subsidizing something in a way that is purely a wealth transfer to business, you should stop subsidizing it.
- ethanwillis 6y agoSo my original comment was really just offering up the mindset behind why Americans are averse to services "costing" money. While I think your comment may have been imbuing a value judgement on my original comment where I wasn't making any.. it does bring up a good point. Obviously this mindset doesn't hold true across the board for all services. The one that immediately comes to mind is farming. I think more people are averse to the idea of farmers/farming operations going bankrupt. I think most people would be fine with a pure wealth transfer to that industry to help it get through a massive downturn. But why does that industry get a general pass? My guess is that food production is perceived as more of a core need than mail/package delivery. Even when mail/package delivery is an important part of a modern economy.