5 ms·

With this correction, are you under the impression that people are assuming there's no cost to running trains now?

by DRW_ 4y ago

hardwaregeek 4y ago
Exactly. In what world is this correction necessary?
- robertlagrant 4y ago
  In this one. People often think things are free when they're actually paid for by other people's taxes or inflation.
  - DRW_ 4y ago
    Who thinks that except maybe some very small, very ignorant and insignificant minority of people? I don't understand why people feel the need to point this out - everyone already knows this.
    - mdp2021 4y ago
      I will raise an exception to the use of '«know»', which is not really defined in terms of "actually discriminate" vs "being able to discriminate". Meaning: It is not that "people know that money does not come from cornucopiae": it is more that they are supposed not to hold the idea. Or: it should be implicit knowledge, not explicit. Or: you do not need to think about it to avoid dreaming that "streets are maintained by volunteers" (for lack of more absurd insanities at hand). Or: it's mental hygiene not to be delirious and work through a "yes/no" system - you are supposed to have plentiful buffers that avoid you holding weak ideas... Edit: or, if really that is something you find in society, you have a big elephant in the room (education) with priority over trains and everything.
      - tshaddox 4y ago
        Can you provide an example where you would “actually discriminate” that something is free? It seems to me that the same obnoxious technicality that opposed ordinary uses of the word “free” can be applied to literally any usage of the word “free.”
        mdp2021 4y ago
        (I am not sure we have fully understood each other, but.) You know that (the software application) Audacity is free (in some sense of "free"), because in your exploration you found the notion. You do not need to know explicitly that Audacity was produced our of an effort that cost resources to the developers and other facilitators, because the proper mental process involves much more that you do not develop the opposite idea. There may be again a link with the words of the late Prof. Patrick Winston: "Intelligence is that you do not need to run around holding a bucket full of gravel to reliably imagine what would happen" (not literal quote).
    - robertlagrant 4y ago
      > Who thinks that except maybe some very small, very ignorant and insignificant minority of people? I don't understand why people feel the need to point this out - everyone already knows this. The same could apply to what you just said. If everyone knows it, presumably everyone knows what you said, as well. Tl;dr: this is a silly line of reasoning.
  - hardwaregeek 4y ago
    Is that true? You appear to be making a point about government spending, which, sure, go for it. But I wouldn't resort to straw men like "people think a free train service costs nothing".
  - tshaddox 4y ago
    No, people think things are free if they are offered at no cost, because that’s what the word means.
  - School-Cotton 4y ago
    Nobody actually believes that state-funded stuff magically doesn’t cost anyone anything. This is just a strawman.
    - argentinian 4y ago
      In Argentina, many people that what the state gives can really be free. Just talk with people from Argentina, ask in forums, if you know people from the country ask them, ask in reddit. It's not a strawman, there are many cases. You may be fortunate and not see them, but in poorer countries with worse education it happens.
  - mdp2021 4y ago
    Robert, go out ASAP and start demanding with the uttermost force that """free""" education is provided to them.
  - spaniard89277 4y ago
    You can bet we know this in Spain.
  - juunpp 4y ago
    Nobody believes that.
AdrianB1 4y ago
In my country, Romania, most people believe the state has their own money that are used to pay for stuff. Even if they pay taxes, people still believe there is no strict correlation. Is it an education problem? Yes. Is it an important distinction that needs to be made every single time until they understand? YES. And I saw that in most of the countries around (former Eastern European Communist countries). This is because nobody tells kids and young adults in school how the basic government financing works, not even in most universities. A couple of million of these Romanians live in Spain. Guess what they think about "free trains".
- argentinian 4y ago
  In Argentina the situation is exactly the same.
- pcrh 4y ago
  Well, there isn't a strict correlation between the taxes people pay and state spending. Typically, taxes cover about 70-80% of state spending.
  - AdrianB1 4y ago
    And where is the rest coming from? Borrowing money? I have an extreme experience and knowledge about the finances of my country, I can tell you are wrong at least for this country.
    - pcrh 4y ago
      Income from government-owned assets, borrowing money, and printing money are the principal other sources of government spending. For Romania you can also add disbursements from the EU.

With this correction, are you under the impression that people are assuming there's no cost to running trains now?

by DRW_ 4y ago

With this correction, are you under the impression that people are assuming there's no cost to running trains now?

hardwaregeek 4y ago

Exactly. In what world is this correction necessary?

robertlagrant 4y ago
In this one. People often think things are free when they're actually paid for by other people's taxes or inflation.
- DRW_ 4y ago
  Who thinks that except maybe some very small, very ignorant and insignificant minority of people? I don't understand why people feel the need to point this out - everyone already knows this.
  - mdp2021 4y ago
    I will raise an exception to the use of '«know»', which is not really defined in terms of "actually discriminate" vs "being able to discriminate". Meaning: It is not that "people know that money does not come from cornucopiae": it is more that they are supposed not to hold the idea. Or: it should be implicit knowledge, not explicit. Or: you do not need to think about it to avoid dreaming that "streets are maintained by volunteers" (for lack of more absurd insanities at hand). Or: it's mental hygiene not to be delirious and work through a "yes/no" system - you are supposed to have plentiful buffers that avoid you holding weak ideas... Edit: or, if really that is something you find in society, you have a big elephant in the room (education) with priority over trains and everything.
    - tshaddox 4y ago
      Can you provide an example where you would “actually discriminate” that something is free? It seems to me that the same obnoxious technicality that opposed ordinary uses of the word “free” can be applied to literally any usage of the word “free.”
      - mdp2021 4y ago
        (I am not sure we have fully understood each other, but.) You know that (the software application) Audacity is free (in some sense of "free"), because in your exploration you found the notion. You do not need to know explicitly that Audacity was produced our of an effort that cost resources to the developers and other facilitators, because the proper mental process involves much more that you do not develop the opposite idea. There may be again a link with the words of the late Prof. Patrick Winston: "Intelligence is that you do not need to run around holding a bucket full of gravel to reliably imagine what would happen" (not literal quote).
  - robertlagrant 4y ago
    > Who thinks that except maybe some very small, very ignorant and insignificant minority of people? I don't understand why people feel the need to point this out - everyone already knows this. The same could apply to what you just said. If everyone knows it, presumably everyone knows what you said, as well. Tl;dr: this is a silly line of reasoning.
- hardwaregeek 4y ago
  Is that true? You appear to be making a point about government spending, which, sure, go for it. But I wouldn't resort to straw men like "people think a free train service costs nothing".
- tshaddox 4y ago
  No, people think things are free if they are offered at no cost, because that’s what the word means.
- School-Cotton 4y ago
  Nobody actually believes that state-funded stuff magically doesn’t cost anyone anything. This is just a strawman.
  - argentinian 4y ago
    In Argentina, many people that what the state gives can really be free. Just talk with people from Argentina, ask in forums, if you know people from the country ask them, ask in reddit. It's not a strawman, there are many cases. You may be fortunate and not see them, but in poorer countries with worse education it happens.
- mdp2021 4y ago
  Robert, go out ASAP and start demanding with the uttermost force that """free""" education is provided to them.
- spaniard89277 4y ago
  You can bet we know this in Spain.
- juunpp 4y ago
  Nobody believes that.

AdrianB1 4y ago

In my country, Romania, most people believe the state has their own money that are used to pay for stuff. Even if they pay taxes, people still believe there is no strict correlation. Is it an education problem? Yes. Is it an important distinction that needs to be made every single time until they understand? YES. And I saw that in most of the countries around (former Eastern European Communist countries). This is because nobody tells kids and young adults in school how the basic government financing works, not even in most universities. A couple of million of these Romanians live in Spain. Guess what they think about "free trains".

argentinian 4y ago
In Argentina the situation is exactly the same.
pcrh 4y ago
Well, there isn't a strict correlation between the taxes people pay and state spending. Typically, taxes cover about 70-80% of state spending.
- AdrianB1 4y ago
  And where is the rest coming from? Borrowing money? I have an extreme experience and knowledge about the finances of my country, I can tell you are wrong at least for this country.
  - pcrh 4y ago
    Income from government-owned assets, borrowing money, and printing money are the principal other sources of government spending. For Romania you can also add disbursements from the EU.