>One simple way to achieve this would be to collect taxes, then pay authors
>or musicians on a "per download" basis, thereby maintaining an incentive for
>full appeal to the public. This could be supplemented by NEA and
>NEH-style grants for "worthy" information goods that, while less popular,
>are seen as contributing more indirectly to the vital wellsprings of the
>culture.
>
>-- Nathan Newman
heh. oh, you dream! and, so, we get to have the gubmint involved in what's worthy. HA! you think they'd sponsor LOB? how's about chuck0's site? not to mention MIT's bonsai kitties!!!
i mean, i think it's worthwhile pointing out to people that they _are_ paying through the nose, even when they think it's "free" and/or tout the wonders of the free market as more efficient. yeahsureright! so, i point out that they're paying in terms of a higher price for goods that are advertised and advertising, as we know, has a very weak correlation with the generation of consumer sales. yet, firms nonetheless poor billions in advertising and branding. so, goods cost more in order to recoup the cost of advertising. that money would be better spent, you say, by redireting it to the government adminstration of the media. ostensibly, we would have some sort of 'democratic' control over it all, via the vote. HA.
kelley