Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site watdcsu.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!watdcsu!dmcanzi From: dmcanzi@watdcsu.UUCP (David Canzi) Newsgroups: can.politics Subject: Re: Doing only that which brings the most profit. Message-ID: <369@watdcsu.UUCP> Date: Tue, 21-Aug-84 03:58:43 EDT Article-I.D.: watdcsu.369 Posted: Tue Aug 21 03:58:43 1984 Date-Received: Tue, 21-Aug-84 07:13:23 EDT References: <740@ubc-ean.CDN> <1050@dciem.UUCP>, <999@hcrvax.UUCP>, <8680@watmath.UUCP> Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario Lines: 33 Ian!> The cost of sending a letter to the Yukon is probably far more than Ian!> the 35 cents I now pay. Should the price be increased to make the Ian!> service profitable? Would anyone pay that price? If not, does that Ian!> mean the unprofitable service should be discontinued in favour of the Ian!> more profitable business to be had sending mail only in Toronto? I say the cost of sending mail should depend on the distance. The flat rate for mail and the government's efforts to maintain it have some annoying side-effects. In order to merely break even, the post office must overcharge people sending mail over short distances. If they just break even, or make a small profit, they can undercharge for long-distance mail. So, private businesses can't provide long-distance mail service, because they can't beat the post office's price. They can, however, provide local services cheaper than the post office. So, the government has deftly moved to prevent this *BY MAKING IT ILLEGAL*. Enforcing another law costs money, requires penalties (eg. fines and/or imprisonment), and a threat of violence against law-breakers. Making an act illegal is not a matter to be taken lightly. Yet the act in question here is an honest exchange between consenting adults. A quick summary of what has happened: 1) One group of people is being forced to subsidize another group. 2) An honest and non-violent act has been made illegal. 3) We must pay, through our taxes, for enforcing another stupid law. Do the people who benefit from the cheap postage need it badly enough to justify this? David Canzi, watmath!watdcsu!dmcanzi Disclaimer: I am neither a Libertarian nor an Objectivist.