he sounds like a noob, is he talking about health care, please give me a public option that isn't bullshit. every bill I see is bullshit. I want premium paid medicare coverage now, the government could even say 3% profit, I only ask how much per pay check or month must I pay for such coverage. that's competition that's free market, government health insurance for profit same as private companies. why is that so fucking hard to do. lower cost and make a profit, I see no hope no change
Well frankly, I think his proposal is even better than taxation.
Issue a limited number of permits, and let the market decide on the prices.
And as said, that's exactly where Friedman says government should play a role. Where property rights are unclear and diffuse.
Or rather, he's saying that if the market can't solve it through obvious property rights, then and only then should the government play a role in forcing the market to pay the cost of the damage it's inflicting.
freidman never stood for taxation...he did stand for property rights and if private property has been damaged, the guilty party owes the property owner compensation...
who owns the air is the question...we know whom owns the land, the house, the shirt on your back and yourself...but who owns the air?
As the government has NO Rights; therefore, no property Rights they are not entitled to just compensation for any means of pollution...
with your point on pollution...to which i agree, because it is infact property damage if your produce pollution can be directly tied to someone else's property being damaged or devalued...anyways, how does government levying taxes to reduce so-called "pollution" come into play?
this doesnt resolve the private dispute of pollution and property damage...this is just a method for government to collect extra dough and increase its burden over the individuals life and liberty...
People like Spencer Bachus are little more than employees who work for the insurance industry and do their corporate public relations. PR is not about disseminating accurate information. It's about crowding accurate information out of media coverage, since accurate information ALWAYS helps consumers and hurts the company.
It will be interesting to see what happens when Brian L. Roberts takes over as the new media warlord replacing Jeffrey R. Immelt (and before him Jack Welch).
It could go either way.
Either way, it's still the corporate media.
We need the print media to counter-balance it and to do the actual journalism that television relies on.
I believe that America is NOT a country. America is the whole continent.
pipe360ful 1 year ago
of Nazareth is also more than a dead jewish carpenter, It doesn't mean it does the world any good.
Somai82 2 years ago
he sounds like a noob, is he talking about health care, please give me a public option that isn't bullshit. every bill I see is bullshit. I want premium paid medicare coverage now, the government could even say 3% profit, I only ask how much per pay check or month must I pay for such coverage. that's competition that's free market, government health insurance for profit same as private companies. why is that so fucking hard to do. lower cost and make a profit, I see no hope no change
sx200ser 2 years ago
this country was founded on freedom, unfortunately unlimited freedom often causes suffering to others.
there used to be the freedom to own slaves
today there is the freedom of corporations to bribe our politicians
today there is the freedom of corporations to provoke wars and sell lots of weaponry as a result
today there is the freedom of pharmaceutical corporations to overcharge medication so that people cant afford it
isnt freedom fabulous?
signboyy 2 years ago
@helltrackrider
Well frankly, I think his proposal is even better than taxation.
Issue a limited number of permits, and let the market decide on the prices.
And as said, that's exactly where Friedman says government should play a role. Where property rights are unclear and diffuse.
Or rather, he's saying that if the market can't solve it through obvious property rights, then and only then should the government play a role in forcing the market to pay the cost of the damage it's inflicting.
greyflcn 2 years ago
im aware of how freidman explains it...
freidman never stood for taxation...he did stand for property rights and if private property has been damaged, the guilty party owes the property owner compensation...
who owns the air is the question...we know whom owns the land, the house, the shirt on your back and yourself...but who owns the air?
As the government has NO Rights; therefore, no property Rights they are not entitled to just compensation for any means of pollution...
helltrackrider 2 years ago
@helltrackrider
Well still within the context of conventional air pollution, here's how Milton Friedman explains it:
greyfalcon. net/ milton
greyflcn 2 years ago
with your point on pollution...to which i agree, because it is infact property damage if your produce pollution can be directly tied to someone else's property being damaged or devalued...anyways, how does government levying taxes to reduce so-called "pollution" come into play?
this doesnt resolve the private dispute of pollution and property damage...this is just a method for government to collect extra dough and increase its burden over the individuals life and liberty...
helltrackrider 2 years ago
People like Spencer Bachus are little more than employees who work for the insurance industry and do their corporate public relations. PR is not about disseminating accurate information. It's about crowding accurate information out of media coverage, since accurate information ALWAYS helps consumers and hurts the company.
ReliableInsider 2 years ago
It will be interesting to see what happens when Brian L. Roberts takes over as the new media warlord replacing Jeffrey R. Immelt (and before him Jack Welch).
It could go either way.
Either way, it's still the corporate media.
We need the print media to counter-balance it and to do the actual journalism that television relies on.
ReliableInsider 2 years ago