Joe did nothing wrong in rationing the water, which cannot have an unlimited supply. The femicommies clearly are going to repeat the green place disaster by never turning the supply of water off and causing joes supply of water dry up. See commies bad, dictator/cult leader good. Want some milk? ;)
E: wait what https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijplur/v8y2017i1p68-79.html
E2: wow there is a whole genre of this shit http://4liberty.eu/mad-max-economy/ (this one is funny because he doesnt know about NKs weird high tech software industry (main export product stealing bitcoins and [facial recognition software](https://www.biometricupdate.com/201911/north-korea-introducing-facial-recognition-tech-developed-in-country-to-domestic-market) ) (NKs people should still be freed from dictatorship however)
E3: https://medium.com/@EdgarTwilson/mad-max-better-than-econ-101-ebe36cc2a582 mad max is a good tool for teaching because one of the bad guys is an accountant and the guns an butter theory (which he admits doesnt fit).
What a ~~wild~~ mad world of economic analysis.
Don't let atrocities get in the way of a good economic lesson.
I'm surprised that my 'the femicommies are gonna drain the water' quick hot take seems to be the least silly analysis (and utterly wrong in predicting how these economic analysis work, I keep forgetting that some people don't believe resources can run out in a meaningful way ('technology uh, will find a way')).
Conans wheel of pain https://conan.fandom.com/wiki/Wheel_of_Pain teaches us that if we reduce slavery, some slaves will just become super strong to do the same work.
From your second link:
>While observing the life of peasants back in the 18th century, Robert Malthus concluded that the number of people is growing geometrically while the food production – arithmetically, thus suggesting overpopulation and scarcity of food in the future.
Pretty useless factoid he whips out there, considering the state of agriculture ever since [Norman Borlaug](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Borlaug) came along. To my knowledge, he's the only person credited with saving lives in the **b**illion.
Ha, I was at Borlaug's alma mater as a Plant Biology student before completely switching gears. I remember that problem coming up in all the soil science classes, there was definitely feeling of urgency from the professors towards solving the problem before it hit the fan. I wish I could bring some good news on the progress, but I've been out of the loop for a decade now. People who study farming academically and work with the farmers through the Extension office are on it, though.
No matter how on it they are, you can't get infinite production from a finite system of materials. Capitalism will starve out any innovations made over the course of this century, until the dying starts.
Light energy can be counted as a material or it can not be, depending on what kind of model you want to use and how it defines “material”. However, even modelling light energy as a limitless source as an infinite source of material doesn’t get you “infinite production“ in the sense here intended unless your model has gone badly wrong somewhere.
It is maddening that so many people missed that malthusian predictions were wrong. (And yes, im aware that malthusian being wrong does counter my 'tech will find way' dismissal).
I think it depends *where* you live. In New York only the well off can afford all the fees associated with owning and parking a car on the city. Since you don’t need one, poor people probably won’t bother. In Georgia you need a car because the alternative is walking for hours to get anywhere. Cars are also cheaper to own in Georgia. So almost everyone in Georgia has a car.
Working class people in the suburbs and rural areas tend to need reliable transportation for work and just existing because everything is so far away, and public transportation either is scarce or not present. Doesn't mean that they own the vehicles they have access to, or that there aren't millions of poor people without reliable transportation and are thus without the means to participate in society in a meaningful way.
Non-car ownership is actually surprisingly high. If you're living in a city, it's disproportionately the below-poverty people who own zero cars, because getting a non-PoS car is often the driver of getting a good job (or moving out) vs getting a min wage local job.
Obviously, this person is living in a world of agglomerated stats, where if it's not far off from their their neighborhood, it's wrong.
>Oh lord, won't you buy me a Mercedes-Benz
>My friends all have Porches, I must make amends
>Worked hard all my lifetime, no help from my friends
>So lord, won't you buy me a Mercedes-Benz
>
>Oh lord, won't you buy me a color TV
>Dialing for dollars is trying to call me
>I wait for delivery each day until 3
>So lord, won't you buy me a color TV
[Janis Joplin](https://youtu.be/5ddnwyyGo4s), 3 days before [dying from an overdose](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes_Benz_(song\))
I usually trot that example out when I'm around libertarian types. The OP is the [other character from Lucky Ducky](https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-BTaOwmkRXXQ/WWR3Mc0dwPI/AAAAAAAACBg/zlnCpzKPpjspWaL5W8LnGHMANssj0fb-wCLcBGAs/s1600/luckyducky-PovertyLines.jpg).
Yet again, I don't know how the fuck people read Adam Smith and turn into US-style libertarians. Like the ones shitting on his name to tell you ["well yes he said that, but isn't everything else we say good anyway"](https://www.adamsmith.org/blog/on-adam-smiths-linen-shirt)
Funny, the relative cost of vehicles has also plummeted from
1920-2020 in communist countries, almost as if the capitalism that we
should be oh-so-grateful for has nothing to do with it.
Depends on whether you’re measuring the gap via subtraction or
division.
A rich car enthusiast a century ago might’ve had two or three cars,
while the average person had zero. On the one hand they’re only two or
three ahead, but on the other hand they have infinitely
inconceivably times as many cars.
Today Jay Leno owns 286 cars and the average poor person owns one or
two. Now he’s a couple of hundred ahead via subtraction - much higher
than before - but only a couple of hundred times ahead via division -
inconceivably less than before.
Clearly the gap is both widening and shrinking simultaneously.
Also lets not forget that the car is not really wealth. Its an expense hoisted on the poor by America's car-centric suburban development model. Even the cheapest car costs thousands of dollars a year, money that you could save to buy actually worthwhile assets that go up in value over time as opposed to a car which loses value over time. In Europe, a poor person can walk or take the bus to work, but this isnt often practical in the US.
Yes, and no. A car itself doesent increase in wealth (and indeed costs you money) but in practice it probably will help you earn money (if only because many jobs require you to have a car, especially if you live outside of the big cities, and not just in Ameirca)
I am visually impaired and cant get a drivers licence, and you would be surprised at how many jobs that means I cant take.
That's because the cities are designed in a way to forces everyone to drive. That was a my point. America's cities are laid out like giant suburbs, which makes it hard to organize an efficient public transit system. This by design, more or less, given how vast areas of city land are zoned for the lowest possible density.
I mean it’s not a bad point that “utility” inequality (as opposed to
money inequality) is an important policy-relevant metric that’s totally
lost in these discussions.
I’d love to hear this person’s economic analysis of Mad Max: Fury Road.
“My sister, a communist, [fed me a emotion-filled line and I responded like a rationalist boss, with facts.]”
Edit: honestly, this whole thing is GPT generic.
Shut the fuck about not being able to pay the rent and be grateful for how much the cost per square inch of flat screen televisions has fallen
Love to be poor and own two cars, it’s a status symbol not a financial albatross haha
Unfortunately they are a few years behind Fox News. Not just a bad take, but a stale one.
Adam Smith literally spoke on this with his linen shirts example.
And did you know that poor people have refrigerators?!? Wild stuff!
Funny, the relative cost of vehicles has also plummeted from 1920-2020 in communist countries, almost as if the capitalism that we should be oh-so-grateful for has nothing to do with it.
Depends on whether you’re measuring the gap via subtraction or division.
A rich car enthusiast a century ago might’ve had two or three cars, while the average person had zero. On the one hand they’re only two or three ahead, but on the other hand they have
infinitelyinconceivably times as many cars.Today Jay Leno owns 286 cars and the average poor person owns one or two. Now he’s a couple of hundred ahead via subtraction - much higher than before - but only a couple of hundred times ahead via division - inconceivably less than before.
Clearly the gap is both widening and shrinking simultaneously.
*When you’ve gone your whole life without encountering mass production.
I mean it’s not a bad point that “utility” inequality (as opposed to money inequality) is an important policy-relevant metric that’s totally lost in these discussions.
‘I can’t eat an iPad’