Originally posted by GePap
Somehting like 'consumer reports" would have no influence or power, over, lets say, allocating resources towards a transportation gird, health care, specially preventive care for all, defense spending, R&R spending not done by tax companies, so forth and so on.
The situation is bigger than SUV's or pes..those are simply examples of a system in which you argue for letting people buy bigger TV or pants as some greater fundamental good, than say being able to make sure every kid is immunized and all people have access to basic preventive medicine.
Somehting like 'consumer reports" would have no influence or power, over, lets say, allocating resources towards a transportation gird, health care, specially preventive care for all, defense spending, R&R spending not done by tax companies, so forth and so on.
The situation is bigger than SUV's or pes..those are simply examples of a system in which you argue for letting people buy bigger TV or pants as some greater fundamental good, than say being able to make sure every kid is immunized and all people have access to basic preventive medicine.
As I see it in simplistic terms we have the classic representational problem wrt to the determinations of production. To use an analogy the great compromise when framing the US constitution. States of wealth (read large populace) wanted representation according to population, whilst states of poverty wished equality of representation due to member status (citizenship). Seems to me we have in essence that same system already in play. Market economics tempered by government.
I see no reason to change one house of representation.
Comment