|
|
| Re: NY congressman Higgins writes Amtrak's Moorman in support of reopening Buffalo Central Terminal (1430727) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: NY congressman Higgins writes Amtrak's Moorman in support of reopening Buffalo Central Terminal |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Mon Mar 20 22:35:37 2017, in response to Re: NY congressman Higgins writes Amtrak's Moorman in support of reopening Buffalo Central Terminal, posted by Henry R32 #3730 on Mon Mar 20 22:03:15 2017. the mob stops charging you protection moneytherefore, the mob is giving you money You were never under contractual obligation to give the mob money in the first place. It was a relaxed requirement, meaning they took a leech off the RR's bottom line. The person who removes the leeches from the patient is not giving them more blood. But if I give you money in exchange for your agreement to allow the leeches, and I release you from your obligation to accept the leeches while allowing you to keep the money, then I have given you something for nothing. Subsidy is cold hard cash. Not true. Any form of consideration can count as a subsidy. It can be cash, debt forgiveness, releasing you from your side of a contract while still upholding mine, or allowing you to get away with externalising your costs. As long as you're getting something for nothing, it counts as a subsidy. If I have a house and I allow you to live there for free for life on the condition that you (a) keep the house in good repair, (b) keep the yard tidy, and (c) look after my pets and houseplants, then I have exchanged value for value— you get a free house, I get your labour. If I then release you of your obligations for maintenance, yard work, and pet sitting while allowing you to retain your lifetime rights to the house, then I have given you something for free. |
|
(There are no responses to this message.)
|
|