4 ms·
> If it has utility, then it will give the farmer the budget and the willingness to pay. That's not how it works at all. Farmers are rational and the price sy
by nerdponx 2y ago
> If it has utility, then it will give the farmer the budget and the willingness to pay.
That's not how it works at all.
Farmers are rational and the price system is behaving efficiently here. The waiting time is part of the price.
Crop dusting can still be better than not crop dusting even if the profit does not cover the "full" market price. Example: crop dusting improves farm profit by $5000/year, but costs either $8000 for a pilot in a market with abundant high quality pilots, or $4000 in a market of 10th percentile pilots with long wait times. If the actual effect of crop dusting is the same in both cases, a rational farmer will choose the latter over no crop dusting at all.
- carlosjobim 2y agoIf they don't loose money or produce for waiting, then the originally stated problem of farmers having to wait for too long, is not really a problem. Then all is good, I guess?
- nerdponx 2y agoLike poor people spending 3x commuting compared to rich people is not a problem, right? Market cleared, deadweight loss minimized, freedom from serfdom achieved, mission accomplished. Just because someone is maximizing their (ordinal) utility given their budget set, doesn't mean that they're well off by any absolute/cardinal measurement. That said, nobody here actually said it was a problem for farmers, only that wait times are long. I'm just pushing back on your incorrect pseudoeconomic analysis.
- carlosjobim 2y ago> farmers often have trouble getting a pilot when they need it. That quote made it out to be a problem. If the farmer is wealthy or not has no significance to the effectivity of crop dusting. The same considerations and calculations would be true even in a communist economy.