Re: non-profit stuff that is better than for-profit stuff
[ QUOTE ]
Your logic is fundamentally flawed. If the majority of consumers in this market wanted the same thing you want, then the classes offered by the for-profit schools would reflect that.
[/ QUOTE ]
Snowball, this guy is defining what is better by what the market provides. There's no answering a tautology.
Example of a superior non-profit product:
Pacifica Radio, Democracy Now, provide more sophisticated,accurate,and unbiased news than commercial stations. It is much more intellectually serious radio. It's the being non-commercial that gives it independence.
Yet another non-profit, NPR, is just the New York Times on radio, 95% subservient to Washington. Go figure.
I've had the same experience as you -- a hobbiest at the Y gave far better instruction in Tae Kwon Do than the commercial place that charged up the wazoo, and then added hidden charges for unnecesarily frequent testing.
Free market dogmatists will say that's what people want, therefore it is right. But it isn't better, as judged from the standpoint of the artform. They are defining desirable results by whether they are from free, not non-commercial markets. Which is the secret behind libertarian sophistry. (but I do really appreciate what Ron Paul is saying about foreign policy. Spot on and courageous.)
|