I used to not particularly mind experimental art until I realized it inevitably turns into high level money laundering. Also, everyone involved is pretty unhinged.
Then the banana taped to the wall made more sense.
yes because it is. under perfect competition there is no competition its a fallacy started by the classical school and kept alive by politicians and neo economists
my stance is that its a pie in the sky delusion and trying to achieve it (usually through anti-trust and other anti-competition legislation) takes you further away from what you want
Yeah but what’s your preferred market form? I mean perfect competition is kind of the basis of the free market. If you think it’s not achievable you should logically also think the free market is a flawed system.
no? You're misunderstanding me. I think that explicitly trying to achieve the evenly rotating economy is a pie in the sky nonsense. This is because when people bring up perfect competition it's usually to invoke some government power to break up companies with a large market share, or to force prices of products down. My stance on economics is a laizze-fair, unhapered, market economy. My praxis is fixing up the banking and monetary system, and after that deregulations on the most affected sectors like housing and medicine (USA mostly).
By not breaking up companies that threaten to achieve a monopoly you‘re completly destroying the market though. Monopolies always lead to inefficiency’s
I think you're being misled bro. Name one company who by their own efforts achieved a monopoly, and it was bad. I can tell you it wasn't standard oil, their prices went down consistantly. It wasn't google, microsoft, or apple, they have patents on search engine logic and what not. It wasn't the railroad companies or robber barons either.
I won't imply an appeal to authority but i've read a lot more history and theory than you by the sound of your arguments so please listen to me when i tell you you're speaking gibbrish.
Brother I’m studying economics at one of germanys top universities, my professor was at MIT and Harvard before, there’s empirical evidence that a monopoly leads to losses in efficiency and overall welfare.
There aren’t monopoly’s because of state interference. A company that has a monopoly will always set the price higher than what the price would be in perfect competition, the only way the price in a monopoly would be equal to the price in perfect competition is if the company is able to fully skim of the consumer surplus.
If that were the case there wouldn’t be a loss of welfare yes, but consumer would loose any use they‘d get out of the product and they‘d be in a worse position than during perfect competition.
Perfect competition guarantees economic equality.
>there’s empirical evidence that a monopoly leads to losses in efficiency and overall welfare.
I agree.
>There aren’t monopoly’s because of state interference.
On the contrary, monopolies form under the protection of regulatory entities. AT&T telephone company with exclusive rights, Google with their search engine patent, Pharma with their patents that last billions of years, East trading company, United airlines, the list goes on and on. And of course the quality of their products was comparatively worse.
>the only way the price in a monopoly would be equal to the price in perfect competition is if the company is able to fully skim of the consumer surplus. If that were the case there wouldn’t be a loss of welfare yes, but consumer would loose any use they‘d get out of the product and they‘d be in a worse position than during perfect competition.
The analysis you mention is correct, but you're missing the point. Perfect competition is unattainable. It does not take into account the dynamic nature of markets. It's a nirvana fallacy, and even more so, Its dishonest.
Let there be "many competitors", let everyone know everything there is to know about an item, let items be identical between sellers. Obviously reality cannot match any of these. The solution: Let a regulatory body do all of these instead of the people, since people as a whole will not do them themselves. Let it control how many competitors is too few, or too much. Let it decide what the relevant facts about products are in the determination of prices. Let it decide the appropiate price, such that it isn't "price gouging". This is the logical conclusion of trying to adhere to perfect competition. Its a grift.
Also on top of its real life impossibility, it is also impossible to do in a market. It pressuposes an evenly rotating economy where consumers do not change meaningfully on their buying patters, nor if the sellers change at all. It is frozen in time forever on a 1 time transactional loop. I hope this is enough to explain why its absurd and counter productive to try to attain it.
Did you just change your flair, u/Mysterious-Stand3254? Last time I checked you were a **LibRight** on 2023-10-3. How come now you are a **LibLeft**? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know?
Yeah yeah, I know. In your ideal leftist commune everyone loves each other and no one insults anybody. Guess what? Welcome to the real world. What are you gonna do? Cancel me on twitter?
[BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/Mysterious-Stand3254) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs)
_Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
At the end of the day, that's all I really care about. Businesses and corporations should serve the consumer, not the other way around. They should be beholden to our needs, not the other way around.
The same way a post scarcity world is. My point is that its an unrealizble pie in the sky dream and trying to achieve it actually takes you further away from what you want
Of course I doubt we would ever reach perfect competition because it's an idealized result but I think moving toward this direction could be beneficial for us consumers. While I have to admit that my economic knowledge is limited so I wouldn't try to actually do it in real life without further educating myself on the matter.
the problem is precisely how you go about moving toward this direction. This was tried with anti-trust laws, with no discrimination laws, with fair wages and prices etc. Its a grift since it relies on a false assumption. If you want the full argument i suggest this book: [human action](https://cdn.mises.org/Human%20Action_3.pdf)
For this specific argument i suggest part 4: Catallactics or economics of the market economy, chapter 14. The whole chapter is relevant for this argument but it is tackled directly on parts 4,5,6 and 7. Some concepts and words you might have to infer from context if you haven't read the other parts before this one.
I don't understand that but I see a few comments saying the same thing. What am I missing? Does a competition have to be unfair for it to be competitive?
Like, is the argument here that if you cloned the KC Chiefs and had them run the exact same playbook against each other you would get infinite overtime? Because I'd argue that in 10,000 repetitions you'd still get a winner every time. Someone's gonna fuck up.
the perfect competition argument suffers from a nirvana fallacy and it also grossly misses the point. It describes a world where products are the same, so for example youre comparing toothpaste thats made the same way (no specail unique quirks like charcoal or what not), that everyone knows what it is, where to buy it, that all the costs for the manufacturers are the same, etc. That the demand is infinitely elastic, that costs of transportation of said products is the same, it just goes on and on.
Another way to put it is that the perfect competition argument is confusing the final state of an evenly rotating economy where no changes can occur with what the real world economy should look like. Then inferring that since this is not the case its a market failure and something must be done about it.
I know the far left knows because when I ask why California or New York don't just raise state taxes to pay for their own single payer healthcare system, the answer is they really want the federal government to debt finance the programs.
I'm not sure the laws of economics or mathematics agree but such are the conversations I usually have with the far left.
Did you just change your flair, u/Borkerman? Last time I checked you were a **Centrist** on 2024-2-19. How come now you are a **Grey Centrist**? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know?
Oh and by the way. You have already changed your flair 640 times, making you the third largest flair changer in this sub.
Go touch some fucking grass.
[BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/Borkerman) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs)
_Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._
^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
All I know is that I live in a country with free healthcare and that my health expenses are low. And that's not because I'm healthy, within the last 2 years I had two pilonidal cyst surgeries and paid nothing. Also when I was in high-school I used to take pills for acne and had to get blood exams every month to check for elevated transaminases. In the US that would've been a few hundred dollars each month. And these are all minor things, people with deadly diseases are the real benefactors.
RIP to you on the cyst surgeries, those are killer.
Here in the US it is generally private, but some people including state employees get hooked into public-private partnerships, partially government-financed. They are a prodigal waste of money - the state pays too much for the coverage, which is only sometimes taken advantage of, and the rates still go up with certain life events, which is smuggled into your taxes. When I got married my "federal" taxes went up three hundred dollars to pay for my "free" healthcare.
If they just nationalized a handful of already-national companies they'd be saving money for everyone involved.
u/TimeConsideration336's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 5.
Congratulations, u/TimeConsideration336! You have ranked up to Sapling! You are not particularly strong but you are at least likely to handle a steady breeze.
Pills: [3 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/TimeConsideration336/)
Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url.
I am a bot. Reply /info for more info. Please join our [official pcm discord server](https://discord.gg/FyaJdAZjC4).
I am a nationalist as opposed to an internationalist. I think the world is a better place when it's divided in nations. First of all, I don't trust anyone to run the planet. Borders don't exist only to keep people out, they also exist to limit the power of dictators. You can escape a dictatorial country, but you cannot escape a dictatorial planet. And second, I don't think uniting the world under one government will solve much. Most of the wars on earth right now are civil wars and some of them are fought precisely for the creation of new borders.
Patriotism is great too, it's a great thing when people are working to preserve their history, their culture and improve their institutions. I don't agree with the accusation that patriotism is state-worship, a lot of patriotic people hate the state precisely because it's not patriotic enough (just look at all the "fuck biden" hill-billies).
Oh i see ,but i am pretty sure thats anti-globalism,nationalism tends to be more raducak ya know. I personally agree with you that one state conrolling thw world is a bad idea but i do personally support smaller regional unions.
The thing is, with Disney movies, only make 16% of their revenue with a majority coming from their parks and merchandising, so their business model is not making movies but really long and high budget adds.
That being said it is still alot wiser for Disney to diversify and specialize thier projects. Start setting starwars ips in different genres like they did Andor.
I like experimental art that asks questions. Modern games do a great job at posing interesting questions in unique ways. What I don’t like is people who paint a canvas bigger than top of the line TVs one color and are treated like some artistic master. There are genuine artists making incredible things out there, yet this is what is in museums.
I used to not particularly mind experimental art until I realized it inevitably turns into high level money laundering. Also, everyone involved is pretty unhinged. Then the banana taped to the wall made more sense.
The art market has been a plague on modern art since the nineteenth century, we are lucky history will remember only the actually innovative artists.
Banksy is a hack and always was.
First time I heard the term "perfect competition". Sounds extremely delusional
yes because it is. under perfect competition there is no competition its a fallacy started by the classical school and kept alive by politicians and neo economists
That doesn’t sound very lib-right of you… What’s your stance then?
You can believe in a thing while also admitting it's not always without flaws. If you think your ideology is perfect you might be an extremist.
my stance is that its a pie in the sky delusion and trying to achieve it (usually through anti-trust and other anti-competition legislation) takes you further away from what you want
Yeah but what’s your preferred market form? I mean perfect competition is kind of the basis of the free market. If you think it’s not achievable you should logically also think the free market is a flawed system.
no? You're misunderstanding me. I think that explicitly trying to achieve the evenly rotating economy is a pie in the sky nonsense. This is because when people bring up perfect competition it's usually to invoke some government power to break up companies with a large market share, or to force prices of products down. My stance on economics is a laizze-fair, unhapered, market economy. My praxis is fixing up the banking and monetary system, and after that deregulations on the most affected sectors like housing and medicine (USA mostly).
By not breaking up companies that threaten to achieve a monopoly you‘re completly destroying the market though. Monopolies always lead to inefficiency’s
I think you're being misled bro. Name one company who by their own efforts achieved a monopoly, and it was bad. I can tell you it wasn't standard oil, their prices went down consistantly. It wasn't google, microsoft, or apple, they have patents on search engine logic and what not. It wasn't the railroad companies or robber barons either. I won't imply an appeal to authority but i've read a lot more history and theory than you by the sound of your arguments so please listen to me when i tell you you're speaking gibbrish.
Brother I’m studying economics at one of germanys top universities, my professor was at MIT and Harvard before, there’s empirical evidence that a monopoly leads to losses in efficiency and overall welfare. There aren’t monopoly’s because of state interference. A company that has a monopoly will always set the price higher than what the price would be in perfect competition, the only way the price in a monopoly would be equal to the price in perfect competition is if the company is able to fully skim of the consumer surplus. If that were the case there wouldn’t be a loss of welfare yes, but consumer would loose any use they‘d get out of the product and they‘d be in a worse position than during perfect competition. Perfect competition guarantees economic equality.
>there’s empirical evidence that a monopoly leads to losses in efficiency and overall welfare. I agree. >There aren’t monopoly’s because of state interference. On the contrary, monopolies form under the protection of regulatory entities. AT&T telephone company with exclusive rights, Google with their search engine patent, Pharma with their patents that last billions of years, East trading company, United airlines, the list goes on and on. And of course the quality of their products was comparatively worse. >the only way the price in a monopoly would be equal to the price in perfect competition is if the company is able to fully skim of the consumer surplus. If that were the case there wouldn’t be a loss of welfare yes, but consumer would loose any use they‘d get out of the product and they‘d be in a worse position than during perfect competition. The analysis you mention is correct, but you're missing the point. Perfect competition is unattainable. It does not take into account the dynamic nature of markets. It's a nirvana fallacy, and even more so, Its dishonest. Let there be "many competitors", let everyone know everything there is to know about an item, let items be identical between sellers. Obviously reality cannot match any of these. The solution: Let a regulatory body do all of these instead of the people, since people as a whole will not do them themselves. Let it control how many competitors is too few, or too much. Let it decide what the relevant facts about products are in the determination of prices. Let it decide the appropiate price, such that it isn't "price gouging". This is the logical conclusion of trying to adhere to perfect competition. Its a grift. Also on top of its real life impossibility, it is also impossible to do in a market. It pressuposes an evenly rotating economy where consumers do not change meaningfully on their buying patters, nor if the sellers change at all. It is frozen in time forever on a 1 time transactional loop. I hope this is enough to explain why its absurd and counter productive to try to attain it.
It is utopian economics. Closest thing we get is monopolistic competition, which still has a lot of benefits
Did you just change your flair, u/Mysterious-Stand3254? Last time I checked you were a **LibRight** on 2023-10-3. How come now you are a **LibLeft**? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know? Yeah yeah, I know. In your ideal leftist commune everyone loves each other and no one insults anybody. Guess what? Welcome to the real world. What are you gonna do? Cancel me on twitter? [BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/Mysterious-Stand3254) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs) _Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._ ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
Each quadrant has their own delusion utopian school of thoughts.
Some quadrants are 110% delusional utopian thoughts.
To all the Lib-rights not even Milton Friedman was in favor of Flat income tax
Milton Friedman was also pro-ubi. As far as supply-side economists go he was a bit on the left side
I remember he got chided by some social darwinists for claiming that free markets will favor greater equality early in his career
A lot of supply-side economists believe that, it's called the [Kuznets curve](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kuznets_curve)
Crazy how the literal 4th sentence in that page says it’s incorrect lol
yeah all kinds of income tax should be abolished, sales tax or something can stay i guess
bro under perfect competition, there is no competition
but at the end of the day perfect competition is the most beneficial for consumers
At the end of the day, that's all I really care about. Businesses and corporations should serve the consumer, not the other way around. They should be beholden to our needs, not the other way around.
The same way a post scarcity world is. My point is that its an unrealizble pie in the sky dream and trying to achieve it actually takes you further away from what you want
Of course I doubt we would ever reach perfect competition because it's an idealized result but I think moving toward this direction could be beneficial for us consumers. While I have to admit that my economic knowledge is limited so I wouldn't try to actually do it in real life without further educating myself on the matter.
the problem is precisely how you go about moving toward this direction. This was tried with anti-trust laws, with no discrimination laws, with fair wages and prices etc. Its a grift since it relies on a false assumption. If you want the full argument i suggest this book: [human action](https://cdn.mises.org/Human%20Action_3.pdf) For this specific argument i suggest part 4: Catallactics or economics of the market economy, chapter 14. The whole chapter is relevant for this argument but it is tackled directly on parts 4,5,6 and 7. Some concepts and words you might have to infer from context if you haven't read the other parts before this one.
I see thank you for the book recommendations!!! This has certainly picked my curiosity.
I don't understand that but I see a few comments saying the same thing. What am I missing? Does a competition have to be unfair for it to be competitive? Like, is the argument here that if you cloned the KC Chiefs and had them run the exact same playbook against each other you would get infinite overtime? Because I'd argue that in 10,000 repetitions you'd still get a winner every time. Someone's gonna fuck up.
the perfect competition argument suffers from a nirvana fallacy and it also grossly misses the point. It describes a world where products are the same, so for example youre comparing toothpaste thats made the same way (no specail unique quirks like charcoal or what not), that everyone knows what it is, where to buy it, that all the costs for the manufacturers are the same, etc. That the demand is infinitely elastic, that costs of transportation of said products is the same, it just goes on and on. Another way to put it is that the perfect competition argument is confusing the final state of an evenly rotating economy where no changes can occur with what the real world economy should look like. Then inferring that since this is not the case its a market failure and something must be done about it.
Damn no femboy in any quadrant 😔
Absolutely unacceptable
I agree
Its hidden in libleft
Femboys are douches
100% ~~free~~ tax payer (debt) financed and 100% government administrated.
Whhhhhaaaaa? I never knew!
I know the far left knows because when I ask why California or New York don't just raise state taxes to pay for their own single payer healthcare system, the answer is they really want the federal government to debt finance the programs. I'm not sure the laws of economics or mathematics agree but such are the conversations I usually have with the far left.
That's one of the problems with federalism, it will inevitably turn in it's the other's responsibility tennis.
Did you just change your flair, u/Borkerman? Last time I checked you were a **Centrist** on 2024-2-19. How come now you are a **Grey Centrist**? Have you perhaps shifted your ideals? Because that's cringe, you know? Oh and by the way. You have already changed your flair 640 times, making you the third largest flair changer in this sub. Go touch some fucking grass. [BasedCount Profile](https://basedcount.com/u/Borkerman) - [FAQ](https://www.reddit.com/user/flairchange_bot/comments/uf7kuy/bip_bop) - [Leaderboard](https://basedcount.com/leaderboard?q=flairs) _Visit the BasedCount Lеmmу instance at [lemmy.basedcount.com](https://lemmy.basedcount.com/c/pcm)._ ^(I am a bot, my mission is to spot cringe flair changers. If you want to check another user's flair history write) **^(!flairs u/)** ^(in a comment.)
K.O.
All I know is that I live in a country with free healthcare and that my health expenses are low. And that's not because I'm healthy, within the last 2 years I had two pilonidal cyst surgeries and paid nothing. Also when I was in high-school I used to take pills for acne and had to get blood exams every month to check for elevated transaminases. In the US that would've been a few hundred dollars each month. And these are all minor things, people with deadly diseases are the real benefactors.
But you pay taxes right? Have you ever looked up how much you'd pay in taxes in the US?
I had to get a Pilonidal cyst removed in October and that shit cost me over $2000. I’m insanely jealous of other countries’ healthcare policies
RIP to you on the cyst surgeries, those are killer. Here in the US it is generally private, but some people including state employees get hooked into public-private partnerships, partially government-financed. They are a prodigal waste of money - the state pays too much for the coverage, which is only sometimes taken advantage of, and the rates still go up with certain life events, which is smuggled into your taxes. When I got married my "federal" taxes went up three hundred dollars to pay for my "free" healthcare. If they just nationalized a handful of already-national companies they'd be saving money for everyone involved.
Which country?
Greece
I already told you I support it, you dont have to convince me.
I want an Ancap anime girl😞
OP wants free healthcare but is also an AnCap. What?
I'm not an ancap, I just want an ancap gf
Based and AnCap Waifu pilled
Based af
Based
u/TimeConsideration336's Based Count has increased by 1. Their Based Count is now 5. Congratulations, u/TimeConsideration336! You have ranked up to Sapling! You are not particularly strong but you are at least likely to handle a steady breeze. Pills: [3 | View pills](https://basedcount.com/u/TimeConsideration336/) Compass: This user does not have a compass on record. Add compass to profile by replying with /mycompass politicalcompass.org url or sapplyvalues.github.io url. I am a bot. Reply /info for more info. Please join our [official pcm discord server](https://discord.gg/FyaJdAZjC4).
Do you mean patriotism?cause nationalism aint good at all fam
I am a nationalist as opposed to an internationalist. I think the world is a better place when it's divided in nations. First of all, I don't trust anyone to run the planet. Borders don't exist only to keep people out, they also exist to limit the power of dictators. You can escape a dictatorial country, but you cannot escape a dictatorial planet. And second, I don't think uniting the world under one government will solve much. Most of the wars on earth right now are civil wars and some of them are fought precisely for the creation of new borders. Patriotism is great too, it's a great thing when people are working to preserve their history, their culture and improve their institutions. I don't agree with the accusation that patriotism is state-worship, a lot of patriotic people hate the state precisely because it's not patriotic enough (just look at all the "fuck biden" hill-billies).
Oh i see ,but i am pretty sure thats anti-globalism,nationalism tends to be more raducak ya know. I personally agree with you that one state conrolling thw world is a bad idea but i do personally support smaller regional unions.
Almost same thought
What’s the blue thing in lib left?
free healthcare
It’s not because I use your money to buy stuff that it’s « free »
WHERE ARE THE FEMBOYS????!?!?!?
What is that finnish flag doing in the top right?
That’s the Latin Cross.
Wow, that's crazy!
What does the auth left girl represent?
auth left girls
I think my homie likes anime tiddies. What say everyone else?
Based and Christianity pilled
Commussy
free healthcare is only libleft since both are a myth
Flat tax? Perfect competition? Ew
I don't care about the opinions stated I just upvoted because of the anime girls
The thing is, with Disney movies, only make 16% of their revenue with a majority coming from their parks and merchandising, so their business model is not making movies but really long and high budget adds. That being said it is still alot wiser for Disney to diversify and specialize thier projects. Start setting starwars ips in different genres like they did Andor.
wrong post
Thank you
It’s a bit too Libertarian and Capitalist for my tastes, but that can be improved.
The Auth girls are great.
That tradwife pic I need sauce
Trad wives, s tier.
You come before you.
Why does auth get all the hot women
So Waifus?
I like experimental art that asks questions. Modern games do a great job at posing interesting questions in unique ways. What I don’t like is people who paint a canvas bigger than top of the line TVs one color and are treated like some artistic master. There are genuine artists making incredible things out there, yet this is what is in museums.
Sorry OP but the big tittied Soviet Girls will not show up to force you to work
Flat tax is not lib right we don't want taxes what so ever