3 ms·
I don't agree with them, but i haven't seen the argument being pro scarcity. To steelman it, the argument is that without these protections the incentive to cre
by snapcaster 2y ago
I don't agree with them, but i haven't seen the argument being pro scarcity. To steelman it, the argument is that without these protections the incentive to create is lower so we actually will have more scarcity
- boltzmann-brain 2y agoWithout the ability to use asbestos, the incentive to build houses is lower, so we actually will have less houses.
- snapcaster 2y agoThat analogy doesn't map because asbestos wasn't part of the incentive structure just one of many materials