> I don't see how you can be so sure there is only cost substitution, and that there is no additional cost. Because that's how the world works. Schools spend

> I don't see how you can be so sure there is only cost substitution, and that there is no additional cost. Because that's how the world works. Schools spend money to have capability to to miscellaneous tasks, things like putting up random posters. Adding one more tiny task, realistically, isn't going to cause them to spend more money, by any reasonable definition. At worst it will bump out a lower priority task (of probably dubious value), but it's just as likely someone will just spend a little less slack time staring at their phone. tl;dr: it won't cost more, because they're already going to spend the money, one way or another. > We even read that Chaz Stevens raised $14K to distribute Arabic versions of the sign to schools. Which is money the school isn't spending. IIRC, the whole point of the thread required the posters be paid for with private funds. > Someone in each school needs to receive the sign and decide to toss it. > That's a additional cost which wasn't there before. That person has always been there, getting paid to handle random stuff like this: there's no additional cost, it was always there.