4 ms·
The goal of the government reducing these costs is to make sure poor people can use them. A free market solution chooses to not serve poor people, so it can be
by 8note 5y ago
The goal of the government reducing these costs is to make sure poor people can use them.
A free market solution chooses to not serve poor people, so it can be cheaper for richer people.
Its not the same thing.
(Notably, government taxes in software are still 30% revenue, eg. The AppStore)
- forrestthewoods 5y ago> The goal of the government reducing these costs is to make sure poor people can use them. The tragic irony is that the government’s involvement has had the opposite effect. College is more unaffordable than it has ever been. A pure free market solution is not perfectly optimal. But it’d be a hell of a lot better than the unmitigated disaster that exists today.
- WalterBright 5y ago> A free market solution chooses to not serve poor people McDonald's serves poor people. Apple sells tons of iphones to poor people. For the coup de grâce, the free market provides free software to poor people!
- alentist 5y ago> The goal... ...is not as important as the result. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unintended_consequences https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unintended_consequences > A free market solution chooses to not serve poor people, so it can be cheaper for richer people. Your claim is contradicted by the real-world data in almost any industry.