2 ms·
I'm not being pedantic. I think it's reasonable to involve all humans effected by an exchange. If a corporation purchases water rights in an area from the gov
by neonological 6y ago
I'm not being pedantic.
I think it's reasonable to involve all humans effected by an exchange.
If a corporation purchases water rights in an area from the government and suddenly deprives the poor farmers in the area from using the water to grow their food does this make the farmers a negligible part of the equation? In my opinion: No.
You can create your box so that it only fits the participants of the transaction but that would be a fantasy. There are great real world zero sum costs to almost everything in an economy.
- malandrew 6y agoYour examples are pretty much strictly isolated to limited extractable natural resources. This is but a tiny sliver of all economic activity.
- neonological 6y agoNo. That’s just one example in response to your attempted boxing of all economic consequences into the “participants” of a transaction. The example falsifies your claim from ever being true. My claim is that all economic activity is tied to energy and that energy is limited and usage of said limited energy in one place prevents usage elsewhere. Try to find an example that falsifies my claim. You can’t.