Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: jttmab who wrote (218350)	2/14/2007 12:00:30 AM
From: geode00	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

IMO, it's the other side of the equation, the cost structure that is much more important. People are willing to pay much to get much in return. What we don't like is to pay taxes into a big black hole and have it come out the other side with Halliburton stamped on it. If we received guaranteed health care, good infrastructure, lifetime education, basic housing, etc. in return I'll bet most people would be willing to pay a decent chunk of change for it. I don't think most people would really care if, for example, we have nationalized health care or not as long as they felt they were getting a good deal for their money. We've been taught the fallacy for so long that only the capitalists can provide good products and services or that only private enterprise can be efficient. Obviously this isn't even remotely true as the inefficiency of Iraq's 100K contractors comes up against the 140K military there.