3 ms·

> Then imagine thinking that’s a bad thing. You seem to have missed my point entirely. I'm not saying that's a bad thing -- but I'm saying that by your logic,

> Then imagine thinking that’s a bad thing. You seem to have missed my point entirely. I'm not saying that's a bad thing -- but I'm saying that by your logic, you seem to think it is. You're looking at money like it's some kind of zero-sum thing that ought to be hoarded by every local community. You say: > but the gist is longer money stays in a local area, the better off that area is going to be That is contrary to all standard economic theories of free trade. The entire engine of economic growth is that when communities trade between each other, everyone's standard of living goes up. The economy theory you seem to be promoting is what is known as mercantilism [1], which has been thoroughly discredited. Circulating money broadly is a good thing. You don't need to worry about it leaving your local area, because it comes back according to whatever goods and services you produce! You don't need to hoard it locally. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercantilism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercantilism

mckn1ght 2y ago
> when communities trade between each other > it comes back according to whatever goods and services you produce Extractive industry like Amazon kill the local producers and siphon the money out of smaller areas and concentrate it in richer areas. When there are no local producers or wealth left, what is there to circulate or trade? Amazon is an Internet-myelinated version of the Wal-Mart effect, with more packaging waste.
- crazygringo 2y ago
  > When there are no local producers or wealth left, what is there to circulate or trade? If that were true, then sure it would be a problem. But I don't know of many communities in the US where there are literally no jobs, nothing being produced at all. Where economic activity is zero. Some jobs go away and new ones arise. And remote work makes it easier than ever for jobs to move from cities to smaller areas. Can you really show that Amazon has had a net effect of shifting wealth "out of smaller areas" and into richer ones? Especially when you consider the amount of money it saves people in smaller areas, which makes them more wealthy than they would be otherwise?
  - mckn1ght 2y ago
    I cannot. I am operating on an assumption that each dollar that goes to Amazon vs a local producer is an opportunity cost for the community’s long-term wealth. Saving a few bucks here and there on individual purchases seems like short-term thinking and small potatoes. Scaled up, that is what lead to rust belt decay after offshoring so much manufacturing. I know a lot of ink has been spilled on the effects of walmart and dollar stores on local economies, but I will also admit that I have not done any legwork to vet the hypotheses or conclusions, or if I have, I’ve forgotten and wouldn’t be able to produce any citations. As far as I can get in systems thinking with the initial conditions I know, which is assuredly a small subset of the totality of reality, the concentration of ability to produce and purchasing power is dangerous for those in the leaf nodes. I’m always interested to see more data proving me more right right or wrong on this.
dartos 2y ago
I’m not suggesting an entire economic system based around hoarding money. There’s no “money should never leave your local town” ideas here. I’m saying that as a single pragmatic person in the current world we live in, it’s better to spend your money locally. We don’t live in a world where any community is self sufficient, money comes and goes, but for many towns, it just goes. As you said, this stuff is complicated. An individual choosing to spend money at local businesses is not what makes a mercantile economic system.

mckn1ght 2y ago

> when communities trade between each other > it comes back according to whatever goods and services you produce Extractive industry like Amazon kill the local producers and siphon the money out of smaller areas and concentrate it in richer areas. When there are no local producers or wealth left, what is there to circulate or trade? Amazon is an Internet-myelinated version of the Wal-Mart effect, with more packaging waste.

crazygringo 2y ago
> When there are no local producers or wealth left, what is there to circulate or trade? If that were true, then sure it would be a problem. But I don't know of many communities in the US where there are literally no jobs, nothing being produced at all. Where economic activity is zero. Some jobs go away and new ones arise. And remote work makes it easier than ever for jobs to move from cities to smaller areas. Can you really show that Amazon has had a net effect of shifting wealth "out of smaller areas" and into richer ones? Especially when you consider the amount of money it saves people in smaller areas, which makes them more wealthy than they would be otherwise?
- mckn1ght 2y ago
  I cannot. I am operating on an assumption that each dollar that goes to Amazon vs a local producer is an opportunity cost for the community’s long-term wealth. Saving a few bucks here and there on individual purchases seems like short-term thinking and small potatoes. Scaled up, that is what lead to rust belt decay after offshoring so much manufacturing. I know a lot of ink has been spilled on the effects of walmart and dollar stores on local economies, but I will also admit that I have not done any legwork to vet the hypotheses or conclusions, or if I have, I’ve forgotten and wouldn’t be able to produce any citations. As far as I can get in systems thinking with the initial conditions I know, which is assuredly a small subset of the totality of reality, the concentration of ability to produce and purchasing power is dangerous for those in the leaf nodes. I’m always interested to see more data proving me more right right or wrong on this.

dartos 2y ago

I’m not suggesting an entire economic system based around hoarding money. There’s no “money should never leave your local town” ideas here. I’m saying that as a single pragmatic person in the current world we live in, it’s better to spend your money locally. We don’t live in a world where any community is self sufficient, money comes and goes, but for many towns, it just goes. As you said, this stuff is complicated. An individual choosing to spend money at local businesses is not what makes a mercantile economic system.