“You pay to read research you fund. That’s ludicrous”
The counter argument to this is you pay to use national parks even though you already pay for it. A lot of people don't even go to the parks now. Making them free will mean more tax money from people who don't go to them.<p>How many people read this research? 1% of America? If it is free then tax payers will have to pay more to make sure it is available. 99% percent will pay to provide things they will never read.<p>To be clear I think it should be free but want to at least provide some counter point (even if it is paper thin...)