4 ms·
I see a whole lot of confirmation bias and circular reasoning in that statement, which makes supply and demand sound an awful lot like phlogistons, the luminife
by yawpitch 3y ago
I see a whole lot of confirmation bias and circular reasoning in that statement, which makes supply and demand sound an awful lot like phlogistons, the luminiferous ether, epicycles, and other famous fudge factors that millennia of humans have used to maintain their neither testable or falsifiable worldviews. Swap out just a few phrases and we’re at insufficient faith being why the Messiah didn’t return as predicted.
- sobellian 3y agoSo to be clear, S&D is a statement about market prices at equilibrium, i.e. the steady state. Parent pointed out that transient effects matter. Not sure how you got from that to circular reasoning.
- yawpitch 3y agoTo paraphrase, “if you don’t see the immediate effects of S&D, wait for the eventual effects of S&D”… this can only be said by someone who already believes S&D is reliably reproducible.
- sobellian 3y agoThis is no more circular than the observation that an RC circuit has a settling time. If you want a reliable instant reproduction of S&D, they exist. In college I had a lecture where the students were given a role (producer or consumer) and a budget, and the price indeed converged as predicted (despite my best efforts to set up a cartel of producers). Just don't expect the US economy to cooperate and provide a controlled lab setting.