And in the very same breath this dumbass would declare that economic growth is the most righteous and natural aim of any society, despite having just stated exactly why the expectation of limitless growth is a fantasy.
Not “everybody”, just the people who pay you to make this shit up.
The fundamental fact of economics, without which there would be no economics, is the megalomaniacal desire of twenty billionaires to fence in the “Garden of Eden” so the basic needs of the rest of the 7.9 billion normal people are unmet despite the limited abundance easily meeting these needs, administered by millionaires who burn through far more than their share of limited resources, and also pollute everyone with smoke and chemicals, even themselves. -Classical economics
I don’t know if there is enough resources for everyone to have a home and food. But I do know that alot of food gets thrown away because it doesn’t sell, I also know that companies like Amazon will destroy products like shoes if they don’t sell. So why is so much needed resources being destroyed and thrown away?
Sometimes though, there really is enough of something for everyone. But some people get almost all of it and other people have little to none.
Some will say this is a problem that should be solved while others say it’s just a fact of life.
The man the myth the legend.
Well he will be delighted to find out that we are now in a post-scarcity economy where humanity’s total productivity far exceeds humanity’s basic needs plus lots of margin for frivolous extras too
So the reason we need a capitalist ruling class and to work for them and die for them is officially gone, thank you anti-capitalist thomas sowell
Medicare for “All” you say?
I took Economics in high school, and remember the first lesson was:
“Economics is the study of a world with finite resources and infinite wants”.
Bullshit. We’ve had enough food, shelter and everything else people *really* want for everyone on the planet.
There are multiple studies that show happiness peters out once you hit middle class living.
What we *don’t* have enough to go around is *power*.
It’s no good being rich if nobody’s poor.
Sowell is a gifted moron. One of the best morons money can buy
Lots of people here insulting sowell yet not logically refuting his argument.
In fact, human psychology shows that we do not have insatiable wants. For most practical situations in our current world, resources are scarce in aggregate (although heavily unequally distributed which can be improved upon). But no, we don’t simply continue to desire more and more.
Diminishing marginal utility is a well-known fact of behavioural economics.
Interesting that many of the things the government wants are not what people want – 600 military bases WW for example.
Sowell is wrong for the exact same reason that Malthus was wrong.
We do have limited resources, but we don’t actually know what that limit is now or in the future. And without knowledge of the limit in the future, it basically becomes infinite. Also, the rate of individual consumption against an individuals available time to consume causes Sowell’s argument to fall a part.
Economics really hasn’t advanced much as a discipline when compared against other disciplines. In fact, it tends to disregard the findings of other disciplines that would fundamentally alter it, which makes it ideological in a critical sense.
16 comments
Lol, of course he would say that
And in the very same breath this dumbass would declare that economic growth is the most righteous and natural aim of any society, despite having just stated exactly why the expectation of limitless growth is a fantasy.
Not “everybody”, just the people who pay you to make this shit up.
The fundamental fact of economics, without which there would be no economics, is the megalomaniacal desire of twenty billionaires to fence in the “Garden of Eden” so the basic needs of the rest of the 7.9 billion normal people are unmet despite the limited abundance easily meeting these needs, administered by millionaires who burn through far more than their share of limited resources, and also pollute everyone with smoke and chemicals, even themselves. -Classical economics
I don’t know if there is enough resources for everyone to have a home and food. But I do know that alot of food gets thrown away because it doesn’t sell, I also know that companies like Amazon will destroy products like shoes if they don’t sell. So why is so much needed resources being destroyed and thrown away?
Sometimes though, there really is enough of something for everyone. But some people get almost all of it and other people have little to none.
Some will say this is a problem that should be solved while others say it’s just a fact of life.
The man the myth the legend.
Well he will be delighted to find out that we are now in a post-scarcity economy where humanity’s total productivity far exceeds humanity’s basic needs plus lots of margin for frivolous extras too
So the reason we need a capitalist ruling class and to work for them and die for them is officially gone, thank you anti-capitalist thomas sowell
Medicare for “All” you say?
I took Economics in high school, and remember the first lesson was:
“Economics is the study of a world with finite resources and infinite wants”.
Bullshit. We’ve had enough food, shelter and everything else people *really* want for everyone on the planet.
There are multiple studies that show happiness peters out once you hit middle class living.
What we *don’t* have enough to go around is *power*.
It’s no good being rich if nobody’s poor.
Sowell is a gifted moron. One of the best morons money can buy
Lots of people here insulting sowell yet not logically refuting his argument.
In fact, human psychology shows that we do not have insatiable wants. For most practical situations in our current world, resources are scarce in aggregate (although heavily unequally distributed which can be improved upon). But no, we don’t simply continue to desire more and more.
Diminishing marginal utility is a well-known fact of behavioural economics.
Interesting that many of the things the government wants are not what people want – 600 military bases WW for example.
Sowell is wrong for the exact same reason that Malthus was wrong.
We do have limited resources, but we don’t actually know what that limit is now or in the future. And without knowledge of the limit in the future, it basically becomes infinite. Also, the rate of individual consumption against an individuals available time to consume causes Sowell’s argument to fall a part.
Economics really hasn’t advanced much as a discipline when compared against other disciplines. In fact, it tends to disregard the findings of other disciplines that would fundamentally alter it, which makes it ideological in a critical sense.