We are a fun, interesting, and creative subreddit for you to ask what others would do in certain hypothetical situations.
Let’s not just race straight towards how this can go wrong.
Any idea could go to shit if it’s not well executed.
I don’t see this being much different than the BBC.
The payments to creators should be content agnostic. For social media, a good portion should go directly to the actual people and not filtered through the site.
Lastly, it should require a social security number or some other confirmation of being a real person to collect payment, effectively killing bots.
So no ads, creators get their dues, and bots accounts are severely hurt.
Pretty good deal for a couple bucks a month if you ask me.
Sort by:
Best
Open comment sort options
Best
Top
New
Controversial
Old
Q&A
![r/baseball - [Passan] A clarification: White Sox players were not asked specifically about Tim Anderson's use of the word that led to his ejection, per source, but umpires said that it was uttered within earshot of both teams.](https://b.thumbs.redditmedia.com/oEDQ8Ca3JGJ_-4q-Ad_pS03o-Sz_5CsjEayr7YUZpuc.jpg)
Im going to be honest, this doesn't make any sense and wouldn't work for countless reasons.
How is this any different than the BBC that works extremely well?
Well, the international nature of the internet, for one.
No amount of subsidized tax money to companies can properly equal the revenue generated and potential revenue companies are willing to pay. Not to mention the internet applies to the entire world. I can't imagine how complex it would be to properly distribute the money accross every website on the internet.
Advertising is also integral to getting people to spend their money, which drives and grows the economy. So politicians, companies won't like it. And I don't wanna get taxed to help lazy people who can't install an ad blocker.
I don't even think I could stop coming up with reasons on why this would never work.
Well for one, I said payment would require a SSN.
You have uttered the "T" word.
Fuck no