Bitcoin Forum
December 02, 2016, 06:26:25 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: I have some genuine questions.  (Read 799 times)
ALPHA.
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 42


View Profile
November 14, 2011, 09:28:29 PM
 #1

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Letter_Mail_Company

If private services are inherently exploitative and usurious for their clients, then why did this one manage to provide free service for local patrons while providing cheaper rates for long-distance services?

How did it manage to out-compete the oh-so conscious "public offering" before it was unconstitutionally shut down by its government counterpart, for no reason other than to arbitrarily preserve the relevance of the "public offering"?

What makes postal service different from any other "public good"? Why did it empirically thrive for the public and itself as a "private good"?

Why do <95% of goods and services thrive as "private goods", while only a few supposedly don't other than because of obstacles currently faced by the "public offerings"? Why can't innovation found in the private sector innovate past these supposed obstacles that can only be purportedly solved by government?
1480703185
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480703185

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480703185
Reply with quote  #2

1480703185
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480703185
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480703185

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480703185
Reply with quote  #2

1480703185
Report to moderator
1480703185
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480703185

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480703185
Reply with quote  #2

1480703185
Report to moderator
1480703185
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480703185

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480703185
Reply with quote  #2

1480703185
Report to moderator
Hawker
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 700



View Profile
November 14, 2011, 10:07:00 PM
 #2

I suspect that it was because the arrival of rail-roads upended the old logistics systems and the state post office was caught flat footed.  State run systems are often slow to react to changes.

Rassah
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624


Director of Bitcoin100


View Profile
November 14, 2011, 10:40:02 PM
 #3

Because for that to happen, A LOT of pain would first have to happen, and people don't like pain. It's much like the argument of letting the market totally crash and quickly rebound in 2008, versus supporting it but having it linger for years. Like with the market, I guess people prefer slow and dull pain of slow steady growth to sharp and extreme pain of wild swings (even if the end result of the sharp swing gets you way higher than the slow and dull). I guess in some way it also has a lot to do with the majority's risk aversion, something so genetically ingrained that it can't really be "fixed"

Matthew N. Wright
Untrustworthy
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 588


Hero VIP ultra official trusted super staff puppet


View Profile
November 15, 2011, 03:16:32 AM
 #4

I suspect that it was because the arrival of rail-roads upended the old logistics systems and the state post office was caught flat footed.  State run systems are often slow to react to changes.

Because for that to happen, A LOT of pain would first have to happen, and people don't like pain. It's much like the argument of letting the market totally crash and quickly rebound in 2008, versus supporting it but having it linger for years. Like with the market, I guess people prefer slow and dull pain of slow steady growth to sharp and extreme pain of wild swings (even if the end result of the sharp swing gets you way higher than the slow and dull). I guess in some way it also has a lot to do with the majority's risk aversion, something so genetically ingrained that it can't really be "fixed"

It's amazing to see the contrast of responses between rational minds and conspiracy theorists.

Rassah
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624


Director of Bitcoin100


View Profile
November 15, 2011, 05:11:22 AM
 #5

I suspect that it was because the arrival of rail-roads upended the old logistics systems and the state post office was caught flat footed.  State run systems are often slow to react to changes.

Because for that to happen, A LOT of pain would first have to happen, and people don't like pain. It's much like the argument of letting the market totally crash and quickly rebound in 2008, versus supporting it but having it linger for years. Like with the market, I guess people prefer slow and dull pain of slow steady growth to sharp and extreme pain of wild swings (even if the end result of the sharp swing gets you way higher than the slow and dull). I guess in some way it also has a lot to do with the majority's risk aversion, something so genetically ingrained that it can't really be "fixed"

It's amazing to see the contrast of responses between rational minds and conspiracy theorists.

Would I be disclosing my lack of sanity by admitting I don't know which one you are reffering to as "conspiracy theorist?"
Or would I be pointing out a lack of yours because neither of these two are particularly conspiratorial?
 Huh

Fyi, my post was pretty focused on just answering the very last question. Maybe I should've made that more clear.

Jalum
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 223



View Profile
November 15, 2011, 02:13:09 PM
 #6

If private services are inherently exploitative and usurious for their clients, then why did this one manage to provide free service for local patrons while providing cheaper rates for long-distance services?

How did it manage to out-compete the oh-so conscious "public offering" before it was unconstitutionally shut down by its government counterpart, for no reason other than to arbitrarily preserve the relevance of the "public offering"?

What makes postal service different from any other "public good"? Why did it empirically thrive for the public and itself as a "private good"?

Why do <95% of goods and services thrive as "private goods", while only a few supposedly don't other than because of obstacles currently faced by the "public offerings"? Why can't innovation found in the private sector innovate past these supposed obstacles that can only be purportedly solved by government?

Have you ever heard the term "straw man argument"?
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!