4 ms·

Judiciary laws are just one of the many incentives present in the real world. Money is a better data point to base models and predictions than laws. > What if

by leppr 5y ago

Judiciary laws are just one of the many incentives present in the real world. Money is a better data point to base models and predictions than laws. > What if improving society was a reward-in-itself and we trusted competent managers to do the complicated bits? This is the mental model many citizen seem to adopt to interpret their government. In my opinion it's closer to a religion than reality. People that willingly reject great personal rewards in favor of the common good are a rarity. They do exist, but expecting people in power to naturally adopt that stance, or expecting that elections is a good way of finding those people, is a mistake.

pphysch 5y ago
> Money is a better data point to base models and predictions than laws. I completely disagree. Not all value is as fungible as money, because economic value is rooted in the diverse & time-sensitive needs of individuals and societies. My demand for "potable water-value today" is not freely exchangeable, via a universal value medium such as money, with your demand for "quiet sleepy-time value next week", even though these are things we are economically acquiring. Regulations are required to prevent uncontrolled financialization from cannibalizing society.
- leppr 5y ago
  Can you elaborate on that? It seems to me that in most of today's capitalistic societies these goods/services are totally interchangeable. If I'm rich and willing to pay for quiet sleepy time next week, I will get it. If I'm poor and can't pay for potable water today, I won't get it. It doesn't matter how relatively important to each individual the service is.
  - pphysch 5y ago
    And if that individual doesn't get their $0.25 of water, they die. How is that a reasonable outcome in any functioning society? The free market has its practical uses, but allocating basic human rights is not one of them.
    - cinquemb 5y ago
      > And if that individual doesn't get their $0.25 of water, they die. And in reality, people usually are willing to steal for things when they are desperate for them (which markets may or may not price in thru higher prices) before they are just willing to die. > How is that a reasonable outcome in any functioning society? I think the issue here is that I don't think we as people can all agree as to what is reasonable, or what "functioning society" actually means, though we are much better at coming up in aggregate with states that are possible in a given society (despite how unlikely some of those states are). In this, society is comprised of a combination of more or less likely "reasonable" and "unreasonable" states.

by leppr 5y ago

pphysch 5y ago

> Money is a better data point to base models and predictions than laws. I completely disagree. Not all value is as fungible as money, because economic value is rooted in the diverse & time-sensitive needs of individuals and societies. My demand for "potable water-value today" is not freely exchangeable, via a universal value medium such as money, with your demand for "quiet sleepy-time value next week", even though these are things we are economically acquiring. Regulations are required to prevent uncontrolled financialization from cannibalizing society.

leppr 5y ago
Can you elaborate on that? It seems to me that in most of today's capitalistic societies these goods/services are totally interchangeable. If I'm rich and willing to pay for quiet sleepy time next week, I will get it. If I'm poor and can't pay for potable water today, I won't get it. It doesn't matter how relatively important to each individual the service is.
- pphysch 5y ago
  And if that individual doesn't get their $0.25 of water, they die. How is that a reasonable outcome in any functioning society? The free market has its practical uses, but allocating basic human rights is not one of them.
  - cinquemb 5y ago
    > And if that individual doesn't get their $0.25 of water, they die. And in reality, people usually are willing to steal for things when they are desperate for them (which markets may or may not price in thru higher prices) before they are just willing to die. > How is that a reasonable outcome in any functioning society? I think the issue here is that I don't think we as people can all agree as to what is reasonable, or what "functioning society" actually means, though we are much better at coming up in aggregate with states that are possible in a given society (despite how unlikely some of those states are). In this, society is comprised of a combination of more or less likely "reasonable" and "unreasonable" states.