6 ms·

It's true that there are very good things that aren't products. It's also true that public goods come at the expense of private goods. I've lived in several pla

It's true that there are very good things that aren't products. It's also true that public goods come at the expense of private goods. I've lived in several places with "free" healthcare, including Canada right now, and while it can be a great system, it can also come at the expense of a huge tax bill that eats into other spending and slows down the whole system. > > The US consumer rules the world. > Yes to the detriment and suffering of a sizable portion of the world's population. Why is it then that real income & wealth (and with that, life outcomes) have shot up in all the "sweat-shop" countries that stock the shelves of Walmart? > Yes, in a world where we vote with our dollars, a car and a bus are going to be the only options for poor and middle class families. But in Japan, China, Spain, France, and countless other places countless poor and middle class families ride bullet trains. How come we didn't vote with our dollars in to bullet trains in the USA? Have you been to these kinds of places? I've lived in several, and spent significant time in many. Poor and middle class people aren't taking bullet trains to work anywhere in the world. Those things are hella expensive to build and run and ride. Even rich, dense London with its world class mass transit has a hard time delivering an acceptable experience compared to an F150 and a stretch of wide tarmac. For most poor American families, living in a big house in a small town and owning one or more cars is the optimal solution, not some utopian pipe dream involving high-rises and buses.

SequoiaHope 2y ago
> Why is it then that real income & wealth (and with that, life outcomes) have shot up in all the "sweat-shop" countries that stock the shelves of Walmart? We have very different views on the labor conditions of foreign workers. > For most poor American families, living in a big house in a small town and owning one or more cars is the optimal solution, not some utopian pipe dream involving high-rises and buses. I grew up in a big house in a small town and worked doing property maintenance in high school to buy my own car. I have been driving cars for 25 years. Two years ago I moved to a dense city with halfway decent public transit (by US standards). Finally I can walk or ride my bike to my friend's houses. I still have a car and I use it about once a week. But now I bike to work, even in the rain. I use public transit more than I ever have in my life, because the transit is more useful here than in any of the car-centric cities I have lived in before. I am happier leaving my car parked and walking or biking to see my friends and loved ones. And when I bike, I wish less space was devoted to cars - roads and parking divide up a beautiful place. Everything is compartmentalized, and high speed danger is always nearby. Even cities with the best public transit still have room for cars. But I do not think that relying on cars as the predominant method of transit is "optimal". When cities are built to make life without a car hell, then yes people in those places will find a car the optimal choice as individuals. But I have been to New York, London, Paris, and Brussels. I saw how public transit can be used to reduce the need for car ownership and car infrastructure. We could do that in the USA too.

SequoiaHope 2y ago

> Why is it then that real income & wealth (and with that, life outcomes) have shot up in all the "sweat-shop" countries that stock the shelves of Walmart? We have very different views on the labor conditions of foreign workers. > For most poor American families, living in a big house in a small town and owning one or more cars is the optimal solution, not some utopian pipe dream involving high-rises and buses. I grew up in a big house in a small town and worked doing property maintenance in high school to buy my own car. I have been driving cars for 25 years. Two years ago I moved to a dense city with halfway decent public transit (by US standards). Finally I can walk or ride my bike to my friend's houses. I still have a car and I use it about once a week. But now I bike to work, even in the rain. I use public transit more than I ever have in my life, because the transit is more useful here than in any of the car-centric cities I have lived in before. I am happier leaving my car parked and walking or biking to see my friends and loved ones. And when I bike, I wish less space was devoted to cars - roads and parking divide up a beautiful place. Everything is compartmentalized, and high speed danger is always nearby. Even cities with the best public transit still have room for cars. But I do not think that relying on cars as the predominant method of transit is "optimal". When cities are built to make life without a car hell, then yes people in those places will find a car the optimal choice as individuals. But I have been to New York, London, Paris, and Brussels. I saw how public transit can be used to reduce the need for car ownership and car infrastructure. We could do that in the USA too.