Ads on Schoolbus

• sleeper

  

  Maybe the best policy is to take the highest dollar for the ad space possible. If any backlash presents itself from the highest bidder the school can simply say "If you don't like the advertisement the next bid for space will be in 6 months and you can organize funds to place whatever advertisement you want. We are only concerned with maximize revenue for the benefit of our children."
  
  Problem solved. The free market solves everything.
• I Wear Pants

  sleeper;1587247 wrote:Maybe the best policy is to take the highest dollar for the ad space possible. If any backlash presents itself from the highest bidder the school can simply say "If you don't like the advertisement the next bid for space will be in 6 months and you can organize funds to place whatever advertisement you want. We are only concerned with maximize revenue for the benefit of our children."
  
  Problem solved. The free market solves everything.

  A billionaire has bought all the land and roads in my county. He charges a $2 million toll to use the only road that reaches my property so now I can't get any food. The free market solves everything.
• sleeper

  

  I Wear Pants;1587249 wrote:A billionaire has bought all the land and roads in my county. He charges a $2 million toll to use the only road that reaches my property so now I can't get any food. The free market solves everything.

  I would say he overpaid on his investment and neglected that in a free market there are zero regulatory barriers to entry such that a competitor could build roads and charge a much lower price to attract customers on his roads. Even if the competition charged $1.999999999999 million instead of $2 million he would win attract more customers and leave open the opportunity that another entrepreneur could build another road and charge an even smaller amount until the market clearing price was finally reached.
  
  You also neglect that if someone bought up all the roads in the county; the people of the county could move to a county and therefore punish the billionaire's investments until he ran out of money making shitty investments.
  
  I don't know why I bothered responding to a hypothetical clearly thought up by someone with no degree in economics and who prefers men up his pooper.
• Manhattan Buckeye

  ^ sounds like unionism in Ohio and Michigan. I want to work, but I have to pay off the union with my fees.
  
  You see what I just did there?
• like_that

  

  sleeper;1587247 wrote:Maybe the best policy is to take the highest dollar for the ad space possible. If any backlash presents itself from the highest bidder the school can simply say "If you don't like the advertisement the next bid for space will be in 6 months and you can organize funds to place whatever advertisement you want. We are only concerned with maximize revenue for the benefit of our children."
  
  Problem solved. The free market solves everything.

  +1
• I Wear Pants

  sleeper;1587258 wrote:I would say he overpaid on his investment and neglected that in a free market there are zero regulatory barriers to entry such that a competitor could build roads and charge a much lower price to attract customers on his roads. Even if the competition charged $1.999999999999 million instead of $2 million he would win attract more customers and leave open the opportunity that another entrepreneur could build another road and charge an even smaller amount until the market clearing price was finally reached.
  
  You also neglect that if someone bought up all the roads in the county; the people of the county could move to a county and therefore punish the billionaire's investments until he ran out of money making shitty investments.
  
  I don't know why I bothered responding to a hypothetical clearly thought up by someone with no degree in economics and who prefers men up his pooper.

  He owns all the land and roads in the county, no competitor will be allowed to build a road on in the county. That would be trespassing and vandalism/destruction of property.
  
  My hypothetical is no more ridiculous than your assertion that the free market solves everything. Even Friedman or Smith would disagree with you.
• thavoice

  I Wear Pants;1587249 wrote:A billionaire has bought all the land and roads in my county. He charges a $2 million toll to use the only road that reaches my property so now I can't get any food. The free market solves everything.

  Man that is a shitty deal for your county.
  
  The citizens are really taking it up the ass......which is why I suspect you will continue to live there.
• sleeper

  

  I Wear Pants;1587265 wrote:He owns all the land and roads in the county, no competitor will be allowed to build a road on in the county. That would be trespassing and vandalism/destruction of property.
  
  My hypothetical is no more ridiculous than your assertion that the free market solves everything. Even Friedman or Smith would disagree with you.

  Those people have the right to move to wherever they would like to move. The billionaire won't be a billionaire for long if he makes shitty investments with no ROI. In the long run, the free market solves all.
• I Wear Pants

  sleeper;1587277 wrote:Those people have the right to move to wherever they would like to move. The billionaire won't be a billionaire for long if he makes shitty investments with no ROI. In the long run, the free market solves all.

  Would they have the right to move wherever they wanted if they had to trespass on his property to leave?
• sleeper

  

  I Wear Pants;1587281 wrote:Would they have the right to move wherever they wanted if they had to trespass on his property to leave?

  This isn't even worth responding to. I'm not advocating for anarchy; the free market doesn't mean lawlessness. People still have rights like shoving their penis up men's buttholes for funsies so don't worry.
• I Wear Pants

  sleeper;1587287 wrote:This isn't even worth responding to. I'm not advocating for anarchy; the free market doesn't mean lawlessness. People still have rights like shoving their penis up men's buttholes for funsies so don't worry.

  That sounds like a bunch of government intrusion to me.
• sleeper

  

  I Wear Pants;1587301 wrote:That sounds like a bunch of government intrusion to me.

  Free market does not equal anarchy. Time to grow up and/or take an economics class. : thumbup:
• DeyDurkie5

  

  The parents are outraged over signs on a bus?
  
  Get a life people...get a fucking life.
• I Wear Pants

  I'm not opposed to ads on a school bus. But we could also do something crazy and adequately fund our schools.
• DeyDurkie5

  

  I Wear Pants;1587326 wrote:I'm not opposed to ads on a school bus. But we could also do something crazy and adequately fund our schools.

  Blah blah blah. This thread is about ads on a schoolbus, not the political aspect of funding schools.
• Tiernan

  Once again the "Over Cautious Watch Guards of All New Ideas" are stumbling all over themselves trying to find something wrong with an idea that is an excellent source of new revenues desperately needed by most school systems. STFU and focus your paranoias on some real problems for once.
• cat_lover

  Potential advertisers for Licking County:
  Club2K (strip club)
  Fox's Bail Bonds
  Jugz Bar
  Stinky's House of Meth (Not a real business or is it?)
• vball10set

  I like the idea.
• gut

  I Wear Pants;1587130 wrote:And this is where it becomes a problem. The ads are a great idea until they encounter a situation where they need to deny an ad but risk legal costs for doing so. At that point they'd probably have to just stop using the ads. Likely worth it until then though.

  This is a very good point. I would ban any ad that targets children, no matter how benign. And, of course, that would likely result in litigation.