4 ms·
Agreed, the edge cases being the things that people absolute require: the essentials.
by tsally 18y ago
Agreed, the edge cases being the things that people absolute require: the essentials.
- anamax 18y agoWhy do you think that a govt decison maker is more likely to decide on the right mix of corn vs wheat (and where) than folks who directly benefit from making the right decision?
- tsally 18y agoTo ask this is missing the point; essentials are not about efficiency, they are about consistency. As I have said before, the article addresses this point. Did you read it? "The problem is that, while this system is undeniably more efficient, it’s also much more fragile."
- byrneseyeview 18y agoBy what definition? And, by the way, why?
- tsally 18y agoBecause essentials always need to be available to people, even at the cost of efficiency. The article addresses why essentials are a special case. "If the just-in-time system for producing cars runs into a hitch and the supply of cars shrinks for a while, people can easily adapt. When the same happens with food, people go hungry or even starve."
- byrneseyeview 18y agoSo "essentials" -- which, of course, are defined as things that are essential -- must be controlled by the horribly inefficient and incompetent government, instead of being provided by people with a vested interest in their provision. And this is true, because essentials "always need to be available". Yours is an argumentative wheel of Swiss cheese: completely circular, yet full of holes.
- corentin 18y ago"If something goes bad with food, people could starve" I was not aware of that fact. But in which way exactly does it call for government-controlled agriculture?