minnix

I wonder what happened to me then? I had Google music for $7.99 a month, then when they changed to YouTube music they gave me YouTube Red at the time as part of my subscription. Years later I’m still paying $7.99 (+ tax) and it’s changed from Red to Premium.

Welcome to Facebook

Why is it so common that people assume if you don’t like one candidate that automatically makes you a proponent of the other? Is it not possible for you to conceive that both candidates may be power-hungry human garbage?

If a man has a right to rule himself, all external rule is tyranny.

Speaking of WADA:

The World Anti-Doping Agency kept the book closed on 23 elite Chinese swimmers who tested positive for a banned heart medication ahead of the Tokyo Olympics in 2021. Five of those swimmers went on to win medals, including three golds.

The positive tests had been kept under wraps until they were reported in April by The New York Times and German broadcaster ARD. The Times further revealed that three of those swimmers had previously tested positive for another banned substance — again, with no ramifications.

source

Sure. Also as an aside, votes are transparent on Lemmy

Ok, you’re now writing things that have no connection whatsoever to the points presented. There is a good discussion to be had around the two original arguments as they’ve been covered by philosophers and economists for years, but it appears you are not the one to have that discussion with.

The free rider problem is most definitely not made up.

Stateless classless societies have obviously existed throughout history. Every small tribal society is basically that.

Every tribal society on earth exists within a State. As I wrote before, there have always been States after the birth of nations.

Meanwhile, the “voluntary” market-driven society is what liberal capitalism is. It doesn’t work.

There isn’t currently a voluntary market society, since all societies also exist within States, States that are run by governments.

The two original arguments exist within a theoretical vacuum which is my point. Unless you have some kind of a priori argument that solves either one, you haven’t provided actual “proof” of anything.

They’re both invalid arguments with proven answers throughout history. The free rider problem hasn’t existed in Communists states any more than in capitalist ones, meanwhile we know for a fact that trickle down economics does not work.

Your post isn’t an answer to either argument nor has anything been “proven”. Communism is a stateless society, and I can’t think of a time that has existed before the birth of nations. The free rider problem is what happens in a communist society when those who decide not to contribute become a burden upon those who do. Trickle down economics has nothing to do with charitable giving within a voluntary market-driven society, but is a term used to describe stronger economic growth based on reduced tax burdens for the upper economic class.

There are two arguments being combined here. The first half is regarding the free rider problem within a theoretical communist society. The second is regarding care of the less fortunate within a voluntaryist society. They are both valid arguments without proven answers outside of theory.