So you've defined "incentive" to mean anything which causes someone to decide to do something, including altruism. Making it impossible - by definition - for a

So you've defined "incentive" to mean anything which causes someone to decide to do something, including altruism. Making it impossible - by definition - for anyone to do something without incentive. Making the term a catch-all term-of-the-art, with a meaning quite different from the general meaning of "incentive". (Eg, the general term "incentive pay" is meaningless using the economism definition since all pay is incentive.) > some things nobody will want to do without an incentive By your definition, "out of their own good will" is an altruistic incentive, so of course it's impossible for someone to do this without incentive - you've defined it to be impossible. The problem with economism is how this technical definition gets confused with the general definition. I think you just did that. > I bet garbage truck workers don't do it from being good people That's .... a really sad view you have there of garbage truck workers. And of people. Literally no one is saying there are enough people like David Sedaris, who picks up rubbish as a hobby, to meet the garbage hauling needs. But if "incentive" includes altruism, then we know some garbage truck workers are partially incentivized by the public health role they play as sanitation workers, and the pride they get from helping keep the street clean. (Source: my cousin's husband was a garbage truck worker.) The problem is when economism reduces everything to strictly financial measures. > maybe you'll realize why your Congress budget bills look like they do I don't regard the US as having a healthy democratic system. > You might have the privilege of enjoying what you work for. So maybe take some time to realize that you're the outlier here. If every other day I come home from work crying, because I'm stuck in a position I can't change, would that change your opinion? Or are you just sniping at me for the lulz?