This is the correct answer to American's "That won't work because ..." on this thread. Turn your head to the right and take a look at Europe where it is plainly working just fine. Turn your head back left and look at how F'd up taxes are in the U.S. and it's pretty clear that objectively we have no excuse other than "some small minority of people are profiting from a broken system and are going to keep it that way."

First, what works in Europe is not necessarily portable. We could just as easily pick things that are better about the U.S. and badger Europeans about why they're not doing it that way when "it is plainly working fine".

Second, everyone attempts to cast every policy decision they dislike as evidence of corruption, chicanery, etc., but I don't think that's typically the case. The fact that a corporation and an elected representative agree regarding some policies does not immediately invalidate the position, nor should it immediately implicate the representative in accusations of malfeasance.

People have spent significant time in this thread discussing the pros and cons of such a policy, yet you insist that the only possible reason it would fail with the people's representatives is that "a small minority are profiting from a broken system". I guess since an advocate carried around a binder full of positive reviews, we assume that must be the universal sentiment of the people?

Is it not plausible that, as seen throughout this thread, many people simply don't agree that this would be a positive change?

Im not badgering anyone i just know as a european luving in the us that it doesent have to be that difficult.

And the pilot actually proved that it was workable in California, as well.