3 ms·

How can that possibly be a logical conclusion? Are you just being funny?

• Turing_Machine 14y ago
  Your argument is that providing government services to outlying regions isn't justified because those people "chose to live there". You (presumably) chose to live somewhere other than Washington D.C. The exact same argument applies.
  • cookiecaper 14y ago
    His argument is that we shouldn't feel obliged to deliver mail to residences so far out of the way that said delivery is cost prohibitive, not that "no government services should be provided to anyone not in Washington DC". Sounds reasonable to me. The specifics of "cost prohibitive" and "out of the way" can be refined to prevent ideologically-charged, unrealistic reductions like yours.
    • Turing_Machine 14y ago
      "His argument is that we shouldn't feel obliged to deliver mail to residences so far out of the way that said delivery is cost prohibitive" Define "cost prohibitive". Costs exceed revenue for that particular piece? If so, I can guarantee you that the delivery radius is a lot smaller than you (and he) appear to think that it is. There's a reason why essentially every country adopted a flat-rate fee for regular mail way back in the 19th century.
  • robomartin 14y ago
    How can I possibly argue with that kind of logic?