4 ms·

Absolutely. It's hard to say what would be reasonable for any person really. What if someone is looking after relatives, friends, or neighbors who are quarantin

Absolutely. It's hard to say what would be reasonable for any person really. What if someone is looking after relatives, friends, or neighbors who are quarantined? What if someone is buying a bunch to give out to the homeless? When we take pictures of people "hoarding", how do we really know their intentions? That's the problem with these systems. You either limit the good people from doing reasonable things or you expose yourself to bad people. There are some reasonable compromises in between but I wish people were a little less quick to judge an entire person's being from what's in their shopping cart.

WalterBright 7y ago
Rationing comes with a list of unfortunate consequences. Its only value is it is politically popular.
- monadic2 7y ago
  Hell of a claim. Got a link? It’s hard to imagine a resource distribution mechanism as harmful and inequitable as the free market.
  - WalterBright 7y ago
    You don't have to imagine. Just read a book on life in the Soviet Union. In fact, there is a book entitled "Life in the Soviet Union": https://www.amazon.com/Life-Soviet-Union-Report-Socialism/dp/0933028032/ https://www.amazon.com/Life-Soviet-Union-Report-Socialism/dp...
    - monadic2 7y ago
      ...really? Cuz there’s a homeless person outside my window. I don’t see a comparison benefitting the US. I would give all my money to live in a country where bread lines are what people fear.
      - WalterBright 7y ago
        > ...really? You don't need to take my word. Check out the book. It's only $2.17, thanks to capitalism!
        monadic2 7y ago
        What can I pay to live in a world where people fix homelessness? I suspect this is beyond my individual luck and ability. Edit: I do not wish to have an ideological argument. Despite all the conversation about coronavirus relief, many will still die preventable deaths. Much of this is for purely ideological reasons that have been addressed in my opinion more suitable ways in countries with different ideological heritage.
        WalterBright 7y ago
        You can donate to Bill Gates' foundation, as he is doing a remarkable job saving lives - approximately 122,000,000 of them!! https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/bill-gates-most-beautiful-chart-world-tweet-child-deaths-a8210331.html https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/bi... Quite an astounding achievement! If saving lives is your goal, Gates is the man you should help.
        platqq 7y ago
        "Kennedy went to the moon", "Gates fights malaria". Gates gives back some of the money that he earned with dubious business practices. Other people are doing the real work.
        WalterBright 7y ago
        Gates got it done, others did nothing.
        monadic2 7y ago
        Huh, that homeless dude is still there despite Gates getting it done. Sucks for him, I guess, because there is no better way of doing things than relying on the misguided charity of rich folk.
- fulafel 7y ago
  Are the unfortunate consequences worse than the alternative? Depends on what is being rationed and your view on equality measures and economic inequality generally. For example healthcare services are partly rationed in places with public healthcare.
  - WalterBright 7y ago
    > Are the unfortunate consequences worse than the alternative? Yes. For one thing, it mis-allocates things from where they are needed to where they aren't. (Because rationing assumes that everyone has an equal need when they never do.) For example, during WW2 gas was rationed. This produced a nation of people who either had more gas than they needed, or didn't have enough. Naturally, this produced a black market to clumsily compensate, with the resulting crime.
    - fulafel 7y ago
      Ok so that's one other example. But we risk getting into anecdotes. Basically rations are an income transfer when they are used to distribute scarce products. It can result in bartering like you describe, yes, but it's not obvious that this negates the advantages. Does the bartering have to be forbidden for rationing to work? Maybe not?
      - WalterBright 7y ago
        For a commodity that is in short supply, mis-allocating it to people who literally do not need it seems like a strong negative. For another example, let's say tp was being rationed. The amount each person gets is calculated to be the amount the average person uses. One person uses 90% less tp than average, because he's got a bidet. Another uses 3x the average because he's got a bowel problem. Anyone who gets more than they need will feel no need to conserve it, while those who get less will treat each square as precious. Is this equity? How does this make practical sense? (Disallowing bartering won't help here, it'll just make things worse.)
        7y ago

WalterBright 7y ago

Rationing comes with a list of unfortunate consequences. Its only value is it is politically popular.

monadic2 7y ago
Hell of a claim. Got a link? It’s hard to imagine a resource distribution mechanism as harmful and inequitable as the free market.
- WalterBright 7y ago
  You don't have to imagine. Just read a book on life in the Soviet Union. In fact, there is a book entitled "Life in the Soviet Union": https://www.amazon.com/Life-Soviet-Union-Report-Socialism/dp/0933028032/ https://www.amazon.com/Life-Soviet-Union-Report-Socialism/dp...
  - monadic2 7y ago
    ...really? Cuz there’s a homeless person outside my window. I don’t see a comparison benefitting the US. I would give all my money to live in a country where bread lines are what people fear.
    - WalterBright 7y ago
      > ...really? You don't need to take my word. Check out the book. It's only $2.17, thanks to capitalism!
      - monadic2 7y ago
        What can I pay to live in a world where people fix homelessness? I suspect this is beyond my individual luck and ability. Edit: I do not wish to have an ideological argument. Despite all the conversation about coronavirus relief, many will still die preventable deaths. Much of this is for purely ideological reasons that have been addressed in my opinion more suitable ways in countries with different ideological heritage.
        WalterBright 7y ago
        You can donate to Bill Gates' foundation, as he is doing a remarkable job saving lives - approximately 122,000,000 of them!! https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/bill-gates-most-beautiful-chart-world-tweet-child-deaths-a8210331.html https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/bi... Quite an astounding achievement! If saving lives is your goal, Gates is the man you should help.
        platqq 7y ago
        "Kennedy went to the moon", "Gates fights malaria". Gates gives back some of the money that he earned with dubious business practices. Other people are doing the real work.
        WalterBright 7y ago
        Gates got it done, others did nothing.
        monadic2 7y ago
        Huh, that homeless dude is still there despite Gates getting it done. Sucks for him, I guess, because there is no better way of doing things than relying on the misguided charity of rich folk.
fulafel 7y ago
Are the unfortunate consequences worse than the alternative? Depends on what is being rationed and your view on equality measures and economic inequality generally. For example healthcare services are partly rationed in places with public healthcare.
- WalterBright 7y ago
  > Are the unfortunate consequences worse than the alternative? Yes. For one thing, it mis-allocates things from where they are needed to where they aren't. (Because rationing assumes that everyone has an equal need when they never do.) For example, during WW2 gas was rationed. This produced a nation of people who either had more gas than they needed, or didn't have enough. Naturally, this produced a black market to clumsily compensate, with the resulting crime.
  - fulafel 7y ago
    Ok so that's one other example. But we risk getting into anecdotes. Basically rations are an income transfer when they are used to distribute scarce products. It can result in bartering like you describe, yes, but it's not obvious that this negates the advantages. Does the bartering have to be forbidden for rationing to work? Maybe not?
    - WalterBright 7y ago
      For a commodity that is in short supply, mis-allocating it to people who literally do not need it seems like a strong negative. For another example, let's say tp was being rationed. The amount each person gets is calculated to be the amount the average person uses. One person uses 90% less tp than average, because he's got a bidet. Another uses 3x the average because he's got a bowel problem. Anyone who gets more than they need will feel no need to conserve it, while those who get less will treat each square as precious. Is this equity? How does this make practical sense? (Disallowing bartering won't help here, it'll just make things worse.)
      - 7y ago