6 ms·

> To the layman, theories on the efficacy of free markets sounds like a type of fundemantalism > Anti-free-market-ism is the anti-vaxxerism of the intelligents

by jahaja 6y ago

> To the layman, theories on the efficacy of free markets sounds like a type of fundemantalism > Anti-free-market-ism is the anti-vaxxerism of the intelligentsia. Well, I mean, yes? That is blatant fundamentalism. "Everyone who doesn't agree with the magic of the free market is as stupid as anti-vaxxers"

CryptoPunk 6y ago
The theory that free markets are highly effective isn't based on a belief in magic. It's based on the fundamental nature of information and capital allocation. The theory is logically sound in the same way the theory of evolution is. It's accepted economic theory validated by centuries of emperical evidence. Rejecting it based on misunderstanding the science behind it, and believing in conspiracy theories about a capitalist oligarchy coopting the Economics field, is similar to anti-vaxxerism.
- jahaja 6y ago
  > The theory that free markets are highly effective isn't based on a belief in magic. Well, yes, that capitalism will cause a production craze is even written in the Communist Manifesto. What "effective" means in practice however is another thing - there's nothing effective about planned obsolescence, great for the current measurement of economic growth though. > The theory is logically sound in the same way the theory of evolution is. Please refer to a single established scientist that agrees with that cocksure statement. > believing in conspiracy theories about a capitalist oligarchy coopting the Economics field There is nothing conspiratorial to question the theories of the current hegemony who have a vested interests to uphold it. The upper classes have come up with theories throughout history to justify their privileges that have no basis in social justice.
  - CryptoPunk 6y ago
    The production craze you deride is what lets people living in brutal poverty elevate their standard of living. Planned obsolescence is not a general property of a market-driven economy. See cars for example: https://www.reddit.com/r/DIY/comments/zbxa6/resurrection_1986_alfa_romeo_spider_does_diy_like/c63d2zp/ https://www.reddit.com/r/DIY/comments/zbxa6/resurrection_198... 'Capitalism produces planned obsolesence' is another talking point referenced by activists who haven't studied economics and therefore have a simplistic/cynical understanding of it. >Please refer to a single established scientist that agrees with that cocksure statement. Any economic textbook lays out the advantages of the free market, or market freedom, as I've described. That it is generally Pareto Efficient is widely accepted in Economics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_efficiency#Use_in_public_policy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_efficiency#Use_in_publi... >There is nothing conspiratorial to question the theories of the current hegemony who have a vested interests to uphold it. This very sentence puts forward a theoretical conspiracy.
    - jahaja 6y ago
      > Planned obsolescence is not a general property of a market-driven economy. Are you really gonna try to explain one of the most obvious consequence of capitalist profit incentives by some random reddit post along with another dismissive "you don't know economics"? I wrote "single established scientist", not some vague "every book" and a wikipedia one-liner article. > This very sentence puts forward a theoretical conspiracy. It's not a conspiracy where people get together in some room. It's a straight forward structure of incentives.
      - CryptoPunk 6y ago
        It is not obvious at all. There is no evidence at all of a general trend toward planned obsolescence. This is another layman's talking point. The Reddit comment has a link to a chart showing the average life of a car every year, showing how it has increased, and it has plenty of details on how car parts have evolved to be more durable, safer and easier to repair. >>I wrote "single established scientist", not some vague "every book" and a wikipedia one-liner article. You didn't even address what I provided about Pareto Efficiency, which demonstrates the acceptance within the field of Economics of the free market's efficacy more than your quote would have. >>It's not a conspiracy where people get together in some room. Yes it is alleging a conspiracy, and you're claiming Economics in general has been coopted by it. This is no different than anti-vaxxerism.
        jahaja 6y ago
        > It is not obvious at all. There is no evidence at all of a general trend toward planned obsolescence. This is another layman's talking point. All incentives in capitalism encourages quick cyclic consumption, and corporations spend vast amounts of resources to various forms of obsolescence [0]. This can't just be ignored even if you would like it, because it blatantly shows how wasteful the current system is. > You didn't even address what I provided about Pareto Efficiency "I ignored your questioned and posted something else, now please answer what I posted meanwhile I'll keep ignoring the question". > Yes it is alleging a conspiracy, and you're claiming Economics in general has been coopted by it. This is no different than anti-vaxxerism. A field of study with so close connections to power and wealth must be seen with skepticism. It's like not questioning the upper-classes theories of society of old. There's a lot of examples of theories justifying their privileges. There's also an important distinction to be made. It's true that capitalism/free-market produces alot of stuff. But it's certainly not true that it produces freedom, happiness, and justice for all. The problem is that you will take the former to justify the latter injustices. That's obvious bias. [0] Planned obsolescence: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/apr/15/the-right-to-repair-planned-obsolescence-electronic-waste-mountain https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/apr/15/the-right... https://www.green-alliance.org.uk/resources/A%20circular%20economy%20for%20smart%20devices.pdf https://www.green-alliance.org.uk/resources/A%20circular%20e... https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/mar/23/were-are-all-losers-to-gadget-industry-built-on-planned-obsolescence https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/mar/23... https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20160612-heres-the-truth-about-the-planned-obsolescence-of-tech https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20160612-heres-the-truth-... https://www.consumersinternational.org/news-resources/blog/posts/built-to-fail-is-planned-obsolescence-really-happening/ https://www.consumersinternational.org/news-resources/blog/p... https://www.bbvaopenmind.com/en/technology/innovation/origin-and-myths-of-planned-obsolescence/ https://www.bbvaopenmind.com/en/technology/innovation/origin... "Yale University economics professor Judith Chevalier explained to the BBC that companies react to consumer tastes, and that planned obsolescence is not simply a deception by manufacturers, but in certain situations the fault lies with consumers, who do not value a more durable product, but one that possesses the latest technology." (admits to its existence, but just blames it on the consumer instead) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence "An Economic Theory of Planned Obsolescence" https://www.jstor.org/stable/1884176?seq=1 https://www.jstor.org/stable/1884176?seq=1
pcstl 6y ago
The difference is that we have evidence, theories and data about the free market. It isn't magical, it isn't always the best alternative, but it tends to be a very good baseline that can be "tweaked" as needed. Most people who just outright reject the free market on principle are doing that based on unjustified beliefs. So yes, there is a parallel to anti-vaxxers.
- jahaja 6y ago
  The problem here is that you're outright dismissing the entire Socialist movement and the very prominent scientists (e.g Bertrand Russell and Albert Einstein) within its history as quacks. That doesn't make any sense whatsoever and require more evidence than just "This is the current system, hence it's proven". The current "science" of economics are gobsmacked by every other crash that regularly comes around.
  - pcstl 6y ago
    Bertrand Russell was an amazing logician and mathematician. Albert Einstein was an incredible physicist. I would trust none of them to handle economics. When it comes to the socialist movement, whatever upsides it might have, its history regarding handling of economics isn't stellar either. Also, I didn't say anything resembling "this is the current system, hence it's proven". All I said is that the free market has been studied and analyzed for ages, and we know a lot about it, including that it generates decent outcomes in many cases. Re: economics and crashes - I fail to see how the existence of crashes - which is predicted by many economic theories, be they mainstream or not - invalidates anything.
    - jahaja 6y ago
      > Bertrand Russell was an amazing logician and mathematician. Albert Einstein was an incredible physicist. I would trust none of them to handle economics. You guys need to stop pretending that economics is 1. something really really hard that only the most brilliant economists can understand, 2. something fundamentally objective like physics. It was in large part of history even referred to as political economy for crying out loud. It is true that the study of economics is primarily concerned with the current system and not particularly imaginative with regards to any sort of alternative. Furthermore the incentives are in no way encouraging to challenge the current way of things, if anything the direct opposite. This state of affairs just can't be ignored when evaluating the objective nature of a certain field of study. > including that it generates decent outcomes in many cases. For the wealthy. Most of the world is still used as cheap labour for the privilege of the West. > Re: economics and crashes - I fail to see how the existence of crashes - which is predicted by many economic theories, be they mainstream or not - invalidates anything. If a majority of the involved "scientists" are surprised that a crash shows up, it strongly suggests that it's largely based on speculation and external motives rather than objective science.

by jahaja 6y ago

CryptoPunk 6y ago

The theory that free markets are highly effective isn't based on a belief in magic. It's based on the fundamental nature of information and capital allocation. The theory is logically sound in the same way the theory of evolution is. It's accepted economic theory validated by centuries of emperical evidence. Rejecting it based on misunderstanding the science behind it, and believing in conspiracy theories about a capitalist oligarchy coopting the Economics field, is similar to anti-vaxxerism.

jahaja 6y ago
> The theory that free markets are highly effective isn't based on a belief in magic. Well, yes, that capitalism will cause a production craze is even written in the Communist Manifesto. What "effective" means in practice however is another thing - there's nothing effective about planned obsolescence, great for the current measurement of economic growth though. > The theory is logically sound in the same way the theory of evolution is. Please refer to a single established scientist that agrees with that cocksure statement. > believing in conspiracy theories about a capitalist oligarchy coopting the Economics field There is nothing conspiratorial to question the theories of the current hegemony who have a vested interests to uphold it. The upper classes have come up with theories throughout history to justify their privileges that have no basis in social justice.
- CryptoPunk 6y ago
  The production craze you deride is what lets people living in brutal poverty elevate their standard of living. Planned obsolescence is not a general property of a market-driven economy. See cars for example: https://www.reddit.com/r/DIY/comments/zbxa6/resurrection_1986_alfa_romeo_spider_does_diy_like/c63d2zp/ https://www.reddit.com/r/DIY/comments/zbxa6/resurrection_198... 'Capitalism produces planned obsolesence' is another talking point referenced by activists who haven't studied economics and therefore have a simplistic/cynical understanding of it. >Please refer to a single established scientist that agrees with that cocksure statement. Any economic textbook lays out the advantages of the free market, or market freedom, as I've described. That it is generally Pareto Efficient is widely accepted in Economics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_efficiency#Use_in_public_policy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_efficiency#Use_in_publi... >There is nothing conspiratorial to question the theories of the current hegemony who have a vested interests to uphold it. This very sentence puts forward a theoretical conspiracy.
  - jahaja 6y ago
    > Planned obsolescence is not a general property of a market-driven economy. Are you really gonna try to explain one of the most obvious consequence of capitalist profit incentives by some random reddit post along with another dismissive "you don't know economics"? I wrote "single established scientist", not some vague "every book" and a wikipedia one-liner article. > This very sentence puts forward a theoretical conspiracy. It's not a conspiracy where people get together in some room. It's a straight forward structure of incentives.
    - CryptoPunk 6y ago
      It is not obvious at all. There is no evidence at all of a general trend toward planned obsolescence. This is another layman's talking point. The Reddit comment has a link to a chart showing the average life of a car every year, showing how it has increased, and it has plenty of details on how car parts have evolved to be more durable, safer and easier to repair. >>I wrote "single established scientist", not some vague "every book" and a wikipedia one-liner article. You didn't even address what I provided about Pareto Efficiency, which demonstrates the acceptance within the field of Economics of the free market's efficacy more than your quote would have. >>It's not a conspiracy where people get together in some room. Yes it is alleging a conspiracy, and you're claiming Economics in general has been coopted by it. This is no different than anti-vaxxerism.
      - jahaja 6y ago
        > It is not obvious at all. There is no evidence at all of a general trend toward planned obsolescence. This is another layman's talking point. All incentives in capitalism encourages quick cyclic consumption, and corporations spend vast amounts of resources to various forms of obsolescence [0]. This can't just be ignored even if you would like it, because it blatantly shows how wasteful the current system is. > You didn't even address what I provided about Pareto Efficiency "I ignored your questioned and posted something else, now please answer what I posted meanwhile I'll keep ignoring the question". > Yes it is alleging a conspiracy, and you're claiming Economics in general has been coopted by it. This is no different than anti-vaxxerism. A field of study with so close connections to power and wealth must be seen with skepticism. It's like not questioning the upper-classes theories of society of old. There's a lot of examples of theories justifying their privileges. There's also an important distinction to be made. It's true that capitalism/free-market produces alot of stuff. But it's certainly not true that it produces freedom, happiness, and justice for all. The problem is that you will take the former to justify the latter injustices. That's obvious bias. [0] Planned obsolescence: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/apr/15/the-right-to-repair-planned-obsolescence-electronic-waste-mountain https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2020/apr/15/the-right... https://www.green-alliance.org.uk/resources/A%20circular%20economy%20for%20smart%20devices.pdf https://www.green-alliance.org.uk/resources/A%20circular%20e... https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/mar/23/were-are-all-losers-to-gadget-industry-built-on-planned-obsolescence https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2015/mar/23... https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20160612-heres-the-truth-about-the-planned-obsolescence-of-tech https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20160612-heres-the-truth-... https://www.consumersinternational.org/news-resources/blog/posts/built-to-fail-is-planned-obsolescence-really-happening/ https://www.consumersinternational.org/news-resources/blog/p... https://www.bbvaopenmind.com/en/technology/innovation/origin-and-myths-of-planned-obsolescence/ https://www.bbvaopenmind.com/en/technology/innovation/origin... "Yale University economics professor Judith Chevalier explained to the BBC that companies react to consumer tastes, and that planned obsolescence is not simply a deception by manufacturers, but in certain situations the fault lies with consumers, who do not value a more durable product, but one that possesses the latest technology." (admits to its existence, but just blames it on the consumer instead) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planned_obsolescence "An Economic Theory of Planned Obsolescence" https://www.jstor.org/stable/1884176?seq=1 https://www.jstor.org/stable/1884176?seq=1

pcstl 6y ago

The difference is that we have evidence, theories and data about the free market. It isn't magical, it isn't always the best alternative, but it tends to be a very good baseline that can be "tweaked" as needed. Most people who just outright reject the free market on principle are doing that based on unjustified beliefs. So yes, there is a parallel to anti-vaxxers.

jahaja 6y ago
The problem here is that you're outright dismissing the entire Socialist movement and the very prominent scientists (e.g Bertrand Russell and Albert Einstein) within its history as quacks. That doesn't make any sense whatsoever and require more evidence than just "This is the current system, hence it's proven". The current "science" of economics are gobsmacked by every other crash that regularly comes around.
- pcstl 6y ago
  Bertrand Russell was an amazing logician and mathematician. Albert Einstein was an incredible physicist. I would trust none of them to handle economics. When it comes to the socialist movement, whatever upsides it might have, its history regarding handling of economics isn't stellar either. Also, I didn't say anything resembling "this is the current system, hence it's proven". All I said is that the free market has been studied and analyzed for ages, and we know a lot about it, including that it generates decent outcomes in many cases. Re: economics and crashes - I fail to see how the existence of crashes - which is predicted by many economic theories, be they mainstream or not - invalidates anything.
  - jahaja 6y ago
    > Bertrand Russell was an amazing logician and mathematician. Albert Einstein was an incredible physicist. I would trust none of them to handle economics. You guys need to stop pretending that economics is 1. something really really hard that only the most brilliant economists can understand, 2. something fundamentally objective like physics. It was in large part of history even referred to as political economy for crying out loud. It is true that the study of economics is primarily concerned with the current system and not particularly imaginative with regards to any sort of alternative. Furthermore the incentives are in no way encouraging to challenge the current way of things, if anything the direct opposite. This state of affairs just can't be ignored when evaluating the objective nature of a certain field of study. > including that it generates decent outcomes in many cases. For the wealthy. Most of the world is still used as cheap labour for the privilege of the West. > Re: economics and crashes - I fail to see how the existence of crashes - which is predicted by many economic theories, be they mainstream or not - invalidates anything. If a majority of the involved "scientists" are surprised that a crash shows up, it strongly suggests that it's largely based on speculation and external motives rather than objective science.