this post was submitted on 30 Jul 2023
475 points (91.4% liked)

Political Memes

5429 readers
1510 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Firefighters should be a private enterprise and figure their revenue streams out themselves. They don't need the government telling them how to run a business.

[–] SatansMaggotyCumFart@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Roads can easily made all private for-profit toll roads and people could decide for themselves if they want to use the McHighways or the WalMiles.

[–] Kalcifer@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Roads are a complicated issue. I feel that roads fall under the idea of an "intrinsic monopoly" -- by their very existence, they create a monopoly, and are thus anti-competitive, and thus anti-free-market.

[–] Kalcifer@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

I would argue that it depends on context. Take the following two examples:

  1. A densly packed urban environment
  2. A rural countryside with sparsely placed dwellings

In the first example, a fire on one person's property can quickly threaten the property of many others around it. This danger could be argued to be so great that, if in a system where each individual must pay for fire services, and one individual does not, this can be seen as a threat to the livelihood of others -- a form of "aggression", if you will. It would be in everyone's best interest to have a municipal, or community fire department that the public pays for.

In the second example, no dwelling, or proprety is realistically a threat to any other. The only danger is to one's own property. As a result, it could be argued that, in such a situation, the individual could not be expected to pay for the fire service. If they wish to have its benefits, they could choose to pay, say, a subscription fee.