10 ms·

I mean, the whole point of having an economy in the first place is so that people have food and shelter and other amenities. If it can’t do that for the popula

I mean, the whole point of having an economy in the first place is so that people have food and shelter and other amenities. If it can’t do that for the population in the aggregate, it’s broken. Raising the minimum wage would cause some decrease in the amount of resources going to everyone else (comment if you want my mathematical reasoning, otherwise it’s an exercise for the reader). But I’m ok with that.

anm89 4y ago
This is such a bizarre viewpoint. Can you show where its clearly defined that > the whole point of having an economy in the first place is so that people have food and shelter and other amenities Having a purpose is a trait of things which are created intentionally. Economies dont "have a purpose". They are emergent systems. It's like saying the purpose of an ant colony is to dig dirt. An ant colony doesn't have a purpose. No entity with an intentional will created it and it doesn't exist "for a reason", it's an emergent system that forms naturally. The economy doesn't "have a point". It would exist even if no one wanted it to.
- dredmorbius 4y ago
  POLITICAL œconomy, considered as a branch of the science of a statesman or legislator, proposes two distinct objects: first, to provide a plentiful revenue or subsistence for the people, or more properly to enable them to provide such a revenue or subsistence for themselves; and secondly, to supply the state or commonwealth with a revenue sufficient for the public services. It proposes to enrich both the people and the sovereign. The first object of political economy is to provide subsistence for the people. -- Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/smith-an-inquiry-into-the-nature-and-causes-of-the-wealth-of-nations-cannan-ed-vol-1#lf0206-01_head_052 http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/smith-an-inquiry-into-the-...
  - anm89 4y ago
    Political Economy as Smith defines it is the STUDY of economics. Political economy has a point. It is an intentional action taken by a person who want to understand economies. The economies themselves don't "have a point". They are composed of individuals who do things which "have points" but the emergent system by definition does not "have a point"
    - dredmorbius 4y ago
      That's a possible interpretation, but it is strongly at odds with numerous other statement Smith makes within both Wealth of Nations and A Theory of Moral Sentiments. It's likewise implausible as Smith gives this statement at the introduction to Book IV of the work. Clearly is is a statment of high and general importance to not merely the study but practice of political economy. Smith's editor, here, Edwin Cannan, not only agrees but specifically calls out and further emphasises the passages. The idea that the study would be concerned with equity but not the practice ... does not pass the sniff test. I've gathered some of those here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26127620 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26127620

anm89 4y ago

This is such a bizarre viewpoint. Can you show where its clearly defined that > the whole point of having an economy in the first place is so that people have food and shelter and other amenities Having a purpose is a trait of things which are created intentionally. Economies dont "have a purpose". They are emergent systems. It's like saying the purpose of an ant colony is to dig dirt. An ant colony doesn't have a purpose. No entity with an intentional will created it and it doesn't exist "for a reason", it's an emergent system that forms naturally. The economy doesn't "have a point". It would exist even if no one wanted it to.

dredmorbius 4y ago
POLITICAL œconomy, considered as a branch of the science of a statesman or legislator, proposes two distinct objects: first, to provide a plentiful revenue or subsistence for the people, or more properly to enable them to provide such a revenue or subsistence for themselves; and secondly, to supply the state or commonwealth with a revenue sufficient for the public services. It proposes to enrich both the people and the sovereign. The first object of political economy is to provide subsistence for the people. -- Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/smith-an-inquiry-into-the-nature-and-causes-of-the-wealth-of-nations-cannan-ed-vol-1#lf0206-01_head_052 http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/smith-an-inquiry-into-the-...
- anm89 4y ago
  Political Economy as Smith defines it is the STUDY of economics. Political economy has a point. It is an intentional action taken by a person who want to understand economies. The economies themselves don't "have a point". They are composed of individuals who do things which "have points" but the emergent system by definition does not "have a point"
  - dredmorbius 4y ago
    That's a possible interpretation, but it is strongly at odds with numerous other statement Smith makes within both Wealth of Nations and A Theory of Moral Sentiments. It's likewise implausible as Smith gives this statement at the introduction to Book IV of the work. Clearly is is a statment of high and general importance to not merely the study but practice of political economy. Smith's editor, here, Edwin Cannan, not only agrees but specifically calls out and further emphasises the passages. The idea that the study would be concerned with equity but not the practice ... does not pass the sniff test. I've gathered some of those here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26127620 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26127620