3 ms·

The entire consumer economy?

by nlitened 5y ago

pishpash 5y ago
You do not need to consume, and only invest?
- nlitened 5y ago
  Sorry, my comment was tongue-in-cheek. In my opinion, it takes quite a bit of hypocrisy or doublethink for people who drive cars (but not bycicles), who live in apartments or houses (but not in dormitories), to type on their Macs and iPhones (but not the cheapest barely-working lagging knockoff dumbphone) about Bitcoin’s waste or pollution with plastic straws, all while having their free time, instead of working in Gulags. There’s a market price for electricity, anyone who pays can do whatever they want with it. Just stop the subsidies, include externalities in the price, and let things figure themselves out. Let people consume, and enjoy life, let them have hobbies, and do stupid things that they pay for.
- imtringued 5y ago
  What does it mean to invest if nobody consumes? Why not just work less? Anyway, if every invests and nobody consumes, then investment itself becomes consumption because e.g. factories need maintenance even if they don't produce anything. Investments are usually self supporting, you intend to at least get your money back. Something obvious: If investments make losses then people stop investing. There is a problem though. Buying existing real estate in popular locations is more profitable so people spend their money on something that basically provides no benefit to society. Yes, invest your money by building more housing and renting the properties out, don't invest by speculating on appreciation. There is also another problematic "investment". Without inflation, holding onto money is never unprofitable so not only do businesses and their workers have to compete with real estate, they also have to compete with money during a recession! That is why we have some mild inflation, inflation is basically a maintenance fee on money and it makes sense because e.g. labor and food cannot be stored indefinitely.

The entire consumer economy?

pishpash 5y ago

You do not need to consume, and only invest?

nlitened 5y ago
Sorry, my comment was tongue-in-cheek. In my opinion, it takes quite a bit of hypocrisy or doublethink for people who drive cars (but not bycicles), who live in apartments or houses (but not in dormitories), to type on their Macs and iPhones (but not the cheapest barely-working lagging knockoff dumbphone) about Bitcoin’s waste or pollution with plastic straws, all while having their free time, instead of working in Gulags. There’s a market price for electricity, anyone who pays can do whatever they want with it. Just stop the subsidies, include externalities in the price, and let things figure themselves out. Let people consume, and enjoy life, let them have hobbies, and do stupid things that they pay for.
imtringued 5y ago
What does it mean to invest if nobody consumes? Why not just work less? Anyway, if every invests and nobody consumes, then investment itself becomes consumption because e.g. factories need maintenance even if they don't produce anything. Investments are usually self supporting, you intend to at least get your money back. Something obvious: If investments make losses then people stop investing. There is a problem though. Buying existing real estate in popular locations is more profitable so people spend their money on something that basically provides no benefit to society. Yes, invest your money by building more housing and renting the properties out, don't invest by speculating on appreciation. There is also another problematic "investment". Without inflation, holding onto money is never unprofitable so not only do businesses and their workers have to compete with real estate, they also have to compete with money during a recession! That is why we have some mild inflation, inflation is basically a maintenance fee on money and it makes sense because e.g. labor and food cannot be stored indefinitely.