7 ms·

> The law of supply and demand is like the Newton's laws of physics, it works. Do they teach this to you guys in school? Many people religiously believe it. N

by kubb 2y ago

> The law of supply and demand is like the Newton's laws of physics, it works. Do they teach this to you guys in school? Many people religiously believe it. Newtonian physics is a model approximating reality, but it breaks down if you analyze cases that can be safely ignored for many engineering purposes, like traveling at high speeds. Supply and demand are worse. They’re concepts approximating certain trends in economic outcomes that almost always break down in real world situations. For example: more supply can generate more demand. Demand can be inflexible with respect to supply. Supply and demand are unstable and can change unpredictably. In a monopoly situation price can be manipulated. Short term large supply can hamper long term. It’s weird that people try to explain the world with supply and demand as if everyone else was an idiot who doesn’t understand simple truths, while in reality they are the ones who don’t appreciate the complexity of things like urban development.

aimanbenbaha 2y ago
>For example: more supply can generate more demand. Demand can be inflexible with respect to supply. Supply and demand are unstable and can change unpredictably. In a monopoly situation price can be manipulated. Short term large supply can hamper long term. What you're describing here is jevon's paradox and it particularly works on unfulfilled markets with high price elasticity. Additionally the field of economics deals a lot of what you're describing in the contexts of monopolies/monopsonies. But as a general rule of thumb, if something has an inelastic demand (as in housing) the law of supply and demand will always be the guiding concept to explain the shortage and high prices.
- PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
  A law of supply and demand that applies only to something with inelastic demand (and housing is not a perfect example of such a thing) is very different than some universal law of economics, and even more different than any law of physics.
whatshisface 2y ago
All of the scenarios you're talking about are covered in economics 101. You're describing supply and demand with them. In supply and demand, you have these things called "supply curves," and "demand curves." The price is on the x axis, and the volume cleared in the marketplace is on the y axis. Changes in the situation move the curves around.
- PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
  > Changes in the situation move the curves around. Aye, there's the rub. Changes in the situation do NOT move the gravity curves around in any scenario where Newtonian physics is a reasonable model to be using. So whatever kind of "law" this "law of supply and demand" actually is, it clearly is not like the laws of physics.
  - whatshisface 2y ago
    The forces in Newtonian mechanics are situational. They would be one thing for gravity, another for springs. Mechanics is a framework for stating things about forces.
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
Gimpei 2y ago
I’m sad to say that you are the one who does not understand urban development. There’s actually quite a lot of research on induced demand (which is the name for what you’re talking about) and there isn’t any evidence of it in the housing market. Rather, new construction lowers rents across the board. Which makes sense. If a bunch of new people want to live in a place and no new housing is made for them, what else can happen but a rise in prices? Here’s just a taste. Do please read and if you have a problem with the identification strategies, I would love to hear it. - https://blocksandlots.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Do-New-Housing-Units-in-Your-Backyard-Raise-Your-Rents-Xiaodi-Li.pdf https://blocksandlots.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Do-New-... - https://www.dropbox.com/s/oplls6utgf7z6ih/Pennington_JMP.pdf?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/oplls6utgf7z6ih/Pennington_JMP.pdf... - https://research.upjohn.org/up_workingpapers/316/ https://research.upjohn.org/up_workingpapers/316/ - https://research.upjohn.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1325&context=up_workingpapers https://research.upjohn.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1325... - https://furmancenter.org/files/Supply_Skepticism_-_Final.pdf https://furmancenter.org/files/Supply_Skepticism_-_Final.pdf - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094119022001048?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S009411902... - http://andreas-mense.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Mense-2020-New-Housing-Supply-Rents.pdf http://andreas-mense.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Mense-202...
- davidw 2y ago
  Here are more articles about housing, supply and demand: https://bendyimby.com/2024/01/01/housing-supply-and-demand/ https://bendyimby.com/2024/01/01/housing-supply-and-demand/
- kurthr 2y ago
  Interesting, please explain China. Seriously, all of the cities are massively overbuilt. More so the smaller ones, but even Shanghai, Beijing, Shenzhen, Chongqing. AirBnB is not allowed. Huge numbers of units sit never used and off market. BTW that's with a SHRINKING population. Overbuild estimate is 50M units (150M people) with some 20M units unfinished. Prices are insane and comparable to NYC/London @ $10k/m2, when incomes are only 30% as high. Why? Financialization. Yes, property values ONLY started falling WHEN builders stopped completing buildings. They were not places to live, they were investment vehicles. This is just as true in London, Vancouver, NYC, SF, Miami, etc.
BurningFrog 2y ago
I'm sorry, but you are completely clueless about supply and demand. All the gotchas you think you've discovered are well known and covered in economics 101 or at least 102. I strongly recommend you find a good book and educate yourself. Grasping this stuff is the easiest way to understand the world better than most. It's also a source of lifelong frustration as you see how cluelessly the world is governed...
yes_really 2y ago
> Supply and demand are worse. They [...] almost always break down in real world situations. > For example: more supply can generate more demand. Demand can be inflexible with respect to supply. Supply and demand are unstable and can change unpredictably. In a monopoly situation price can be manipulated. Short term large supply can hamper long term. Supply and demand do not "break down" in any of your examples. You literally wrote how supply and demand apply in each of your examples. It is simply wrong to say they "break down".
- yes_really 2y ago
  For example, consider "more supply can generate more demand". I agree. In many cases, when a city starts to densify, the simple fact that the city is denser can generate more demand by attracting more people that want to live in it due to job opportunities, culture, etc that develop due to the new density. But that doesn't contradict supply and demand. And, for example, if the prices stay the same while both supply and demand increase, that still has a positive side. It means that the city is becoming attractive while still permitting more people to live in it for the same price.
Etheryte 2y ago
While this is true, roads in urban planning are a good example of this, the more lanes you build, the more traffic you induce, I don't think it applies to housing. For most part, housing really is a simple matter of we don't build enough housing in desirable areas. In many countries worldwide, housing construction doesn't even remotely keep up with immigration and as long as that's the case, the problem won't go away no matter what spin you put on talking about it.
- bombcar 2y ago
  You only induce more traffic where there was already demand for it, or potential demand. Build a fifty lane wide highway in the wilds of Montana and it will carry about as many cars as the current freeway.
  - appreciatorBus 2y ago
    Yes. Induced demand is real IMO, and necessarily restricted to transport, but it's entirely about pricing & value, not some fantasy of infinite demand. We see induced demand in highways because the thing highways provide is valued (land for private vehicle operation), but the price charged is almost always far far less, usually zero. So just like a Starbucks that started to offer free coffee, the result is going to be long lines. If housing was being offered below value, then you would surely see induced demand in housing. Imagine for instance if a govt program committed to offering apartments of unlimited size for $0/month. People would absolutely decide they need a 5000 sqft apartment instead of a 2000 sqft apartment, just as today they decide they need to drive to a store 10 miles away, instead of walking to one around the corner.
    - bombcar 2y ago
      That’s closer to tragedy of the commons (though not exactly) than induced demand.
- nradov 2y ago
  Do those places need high levels of immigration?
miguelxt 2y ago
You are disregarding supply and demand because it's not a 100% bullet-proof model that can predict all price movements in all markets, times, places, or any combination of factors, and at the same time are introducing your own imperfect models and formulations: > For example: more supply can generate more demand. Demand can be inflexible with respect to supply. Supply and demand are unstable and can change unpredictably. In a monopoly situation price can be manipulated. Short term large supply can hamper long term. Any model that tries to predict human behaviour will be imperfect, we all know that. There is hardly a monopoly of housing in Spain, if we keep the current disconnection between supply and demand, prices will for sure keep increasing. There is evidence that building more reduces prices. It's not the only condition needed to reduce prices, but it's an important one: https://commonwealthbeacon.org/housing/study-says-boosting-housing-production-tempers-rents/ https://commonwealthbeacon.org/housing/study-says-boosting-h... https://www.upjohn.org/research-highlights/new-construction-makes-homes-more-affordable-even-those-who-cant-afford-new-units https://www.upjohn.org/research-highlights/new-construction-...
- PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
  > You are disregarding supply and demand because it's not a 100% bullet-proof model I didn't any suggestion to "disregard" the "law of supply and demand". I saw a suggestion that whatever kind of "law" this is, it is a very different kind of thing than a law of physics, to which a comparison was being made. > Any model that tries to predict human behaviour will be imperfect, we all know that. Yet we can rarely even bound the actual scale of the imperfection, so discussing "laws" of economics as if they are in some way similar to the law of gravity seems a little silly.
  - airstrike 2y ago
    It's not different, it just has more parameters
- cyberax 2y ago
  > You are disregarding supply and demand because it's not a 100% bullet-proof model OK. Can you provide me just one example of a large city that reduced the housing sale prices by building more dense units? Not by crashing its economy or otherwise decreasing the population. If your model is correct, there should be at least _some_ examples. > There is evidence that building more reduces prices. There is none. Your studies are basically nonsense. Here's the strongest result: > One study cited in her report found that the average new apartment building lowers nearby rents by 5 percent to 7 percent “relative to the trend rent growth otherwise would have followed” Translation: the prices grew, but we managed to P-hack a small subset of data that shows at least _some_ effect. They could not find actual _decreases_ and had to resort to "would have beens". There's an overview article (that also contains the links to the study mentioned in your link): https://furmancenter.org/files/Supply_Skepticism_-_Final.pdf https://furmancenter.org/files/Supply_Skepticism_-_Final.pdf - feel free to look for the evidence for the failure of the "just build more".
lottin 2y ago
All the law of supply and demand says is that the market will reach an equilibrium where the quantity demanded equals the quantity supplied, and that such quantities as well as the equilibrium price are determined jointly by supply and demand. It doesn't say that the demand and supply curves are unmovable or that they have a particular slope.
- kubb 2y ago
  In this form, the law can’t be used to draw relevant conclusions about urban planning. It’s also demonstrably false, as the demand and supply never perfectly match.
  - sieabahlpark 2y ago
    [dead]
  - lottin 2y ago
    The immediate conclusion is that if there's an excess demand prices will go up in order to reach a new equilibrium. And this exactly what seems to be happening in the housing market.
    - toyg 2y ago
      Price equilibrium is a myth, in practice it's never observed. The reality is inflation, because the greed of man is unbound.
      - appreciatorBus 2y ago
        If greed of man is unbound, how come computers, TV's and airplane tickets are so much cheaper than decades previously? The idea that people involved in housing are some how uniquely greedy has a long history and it's just wrong. People who own housing - homeowners & landowners - are able to be more greedy than others because they are part of a cartel. The debate over housing reform & housing supply is about whether or not enforcing that cartel should be a government function.
freefaler 2y ago
> Newtonian physics is a model approximating reality, but it breaks down if you analyze cases that can be safely ignored for many engineering purposes, like traveling at high speeds. It's a very good approximation and there are special cases that it doesn't work. But for a practical human life-scale reality almost all of daily use technology is based on these laws. Does the supply/demand work in all situations? No, you need to have a at least some resemblance of a free market to let the market forces work. The reasons we know that this law is working are not only empirical understanding (try selling your laptop on ebay and you'll empirically understand why) but there were at least 2 testing approaches that validated it: 1) Experimental validation via: - Market simulation: Repeated trading rounds (Chamberlin, Smith) show prices converging to equilibrium when participants learn from prior outcomes. Public price data accelerates this process. - Policy tests: Lab experiments confirm tax/price controls create predictable shortages (e.g., rent controls reducing housing availability). 2) Modeling approaches: - Random coefficients logit models: Isolate price-quantity relationships by controlling for unobserved factors like brand loyalty. - Industry analyses: Cement and airline markets demonstrate markup adjustments aligning with supply-demand predictions under competition. - Instrumental variables: Cost shifters (e.g., raw material prices) validate causal price-quantity responses. > It’s weird that people try to explain the world with supply and demand as if everyone else was an idiot who doesn’t understand simple truths about the world, while in reality they are the ones who doesn’t appreciate the complexity of things like urban development. This is a strange argument. So basically the supply/demand curve works, but there are some consequences if you change the supply. Yes, they are. But if you want to have cheaper housing you will not save it if you don't build more even if there are other negatives from increased supply. And yes, urban development might be complicated, but the basics of "people need to live somewhere" is not. You might get favelas like in Brazil, but if your city grows and you don't build, because the people in the government and landlords get squeeze more profit from the market the problem will not be solved.
atmosx 2y ago
> Do they teach this to you guys in school? Many people religiously believe it. Well, up until 2008, that was common wisdom. Post-2008? Anyone still pushing that line won’t get far. In this case, that must be the free part of OP’s nickname speaking, right before the faler kicks in.

by kubb 2y ago

aimanbenbaha 2y ago

>For example: more supply can generate more demand. Demand can be inflexible with respect to supply. Supply and demand are unstable and can change unpredictably. In a monopoly situation price can be manipulated. Short term large supply can hamper long term. What you're describing here is jevon's paradox and it particularly works on unfulfilled markets with high price elasticity. Additionally the field of economics deals a lot of what you're describing in the contexts of monopolies/monopsonies. But as a general rule of thumb, if something has an inelastic demand (as in housing) the law of supply and demand will always be the guiding concept to explain the shortage and high prices.

PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
A law of supply and demand that applies only to something with inelastic demand (and housing is not a perfect example of such a thing) is very different than some universal law of economics, and even more different than any law of physics.

whatshisface 2y ago

All of the scenarios you're talking about are covered in economics 101. You're describing supply and demand with them. In supply and demand, you have these things called "supply curves," and "demand curves." The price is on the x axis, and the volume cleared in the marketplace is on the y axis. Changes in the situation move the curves around.

PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
> Changes in the situation move the curves around. Aye, there's the rub. Changes in the situation do NOT move the gravity curves around in any scenario where Newtonian physics is a reasonable model to be using. So whatever kind of "law" this "law of supply and demand" actually is, it clearly is not like the laws of physics.
- whatshisface 2y ago
  The forces in Newtonian mechanics are situational. They would be one thing for gravity, another for springs. Mechanics is a framework for stating things about forces.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]

Gimpei 2y ago

I’m sad to say that you are the one who does not understand urban development. There’s actually quite a lot of research on induced demand (which is the name for what you’re talking about) and there isn’t any evidence of it in the housing market. Rather, new construction lowers rents across the board. Which makes sense. If a bunch of new people want to live in a place and no new housing is made for them, what else can happen but a rise in prices? Here’s just a taste. Do please read and if you have a problem with the identification strategies, I would love to hear it. - https://blocksandlots.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Do-New-Housing-Units-in-Your-Backyard-Raise-Your-Rents-Xiaodi-Li.pdf https://blocksandlots.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Do-New-... - https://www.dropbox.com/s/oplls6utgf7z6ih/Pennington_JMP.pdf?dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/s/oplls6utgf7z6ih/Pennington_JMP.pdf... - https://research.upjohn.org/up_workingpapers/316/ https://research.upjohn.org/up_workingpapers/316/ - https://research.upjohn.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1325&context=up_workingpapers https://research.upjohn.org/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1325... - https://furmancenter.org/files/Supply_Skepticism_-_Final.pdf https://furmancenter.org/files/Supply_Skepticism_-_Final.pdf - https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0094119022001048?via%3Dihub https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S009411902... - http://andreas-mense.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Mense-2020-New-Housing-Supply-Rents.pdf http://andreas-mense.de/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Mense-202...

davidw 2y ago
Here are more articles about housing, supply and demand: https://bendyimby.com/2024/01/01/housing-supply-and-demand/ https://bendyimby.com/2024/01/01/housing-supply-and-demand/
kurthr 2y ago
Interesting, please explain China. Seriously, all of the cities are massively overbuilt. More so the smaller ones, but even Shanghai, Beijing, Shenzhen, Chongqing. AirBnB is not allowed. Huge numbers of units sit never used and off market. BTW that's with a SHRINKING population. Overbuild estimate is 50M units (150M people) with some 20M units unfinished. Prices are insane and comparable to NYC/London @ $10k/m2, when incomes are only 30% as high. Why? Financialization. Yes, property values ONLY started falling WHEN builders stopped completing buildings. They were not places to live, they were investment vehicles. This is just as true in London, Vancouver, NYC, SF, Miami, etc.

BurningFrog 2y ago

I'm sorry, but you are completely clueless about supply and demand. All the gotchas you think you've discovered are well known and covered in economics 101 or at least 102. I strongly recommend you find a good book and educate yourself. Grasping this stuff is the easiest way to understand the world better than most. It's also a source of lifelong frustration as you see how cluelessly the world is governed...

yes_really 2y ago

> Supply and demand are worse. They [...] almost always break down in real world situations. > For example: more supply can generate more demand. Demand can be inflexible with respect to supply. Supply and demand are unstable and can change unpredictably. In a monopoly situation price can be manipulated. Short term large supply can hamper long term. Supply and demand do not "break down" in any of your examples. You literally wrote how supply and demand apply in each of your examples. It is simply wrong to say they "break down".

yes_really 2y ago
For example, consider "more supply can generate more demand". I agree. In many cases, when a city starts to densify, the simple fact that the city is denser can generate more demand by attracting more people that want to live in it due to job opportunities, culture, etc that develop due to the new density. But that doesn't contradict supply and demand. And, for example, if the prices stay the same while both supply and demand increase, that still has a positive side. It means that the city is becoming attractive while still permitting more people to live in it for the same price.

Etheryte 2y ago

While this is true, roads in urban planning are a good example of this, the more lanes you build, the more traffic you induce, I don't think it applies to housing. For most part, housing really is a simple matter of we don't build enough housing in desirable areas. In many countries worldwide, housing construction doesn't even remotely keep up with immigration and as long as that's the case, the problem won't go away no matter what spin you put on talking about it.

bombcar 2y ago
You only induce more traffic where there was already demand for it, or potential demand. Build a fifty lane wide highway in the wilds of Montana and it will carry about as many cars as the current freeway.
- appreciatorBus 2y ago
  Yes. Induced demand is real IMO, and necessarily restricted to transport, but it's entirely about pricing & value, not some fantasy of infinite demand. We see induced demand in highways because the thing highways provide is valued (land for private vehicle operation), but the price charged is almost always far far less, usually zero. So just like a Starbucks that started to offer free coffee, the result is going to be long lines. If housing was being offered below value, then you would surely see induced demand in housing. Imagine for instance if a govt program committed to offering apartments of unlimited size for $0/month. People would absolutely decide they need a 5000 sqft apartment instead of a 2000 sqft apartment, just as today they decide they need to drive to a store 10 miles away, instead of walking to one around the corner.
  - bombcar 2y ago
    That’s closer to tragedy of the commons (though not exactly) than induced demand.
nradov 2y ago
Do those places need high levels of immigration?

miguelxt 2y ago

You are disregarding supply and demand because it's not a 100% bullet-proof model that can predict all price movements in all markets, times, places, or any combination of factors, and at the same time are introducing your own imperfect models and formulations: > For example: more supply can generate more demand. Demand can be inflexible with respect to supply. Supply and demand are unstable and can change unpredictably. In a monopoly situation price can be manipulated. Short term large supply can hamper long term. Any model that tries to predict human behaviour will be imperfect, we all know that. There is hardly a monopoly of housing in Spain, if we keep the current disconnection between supply and demand, prices will for sure keep increasing. There is evidence that building more reduces prices. It's not the only condition needed to reduce prices, but it's an important one: https://commonwealthbeacon.org/housing/study-says-boosting-housing-production-tempers-rents/ https://commonwealthbeacon.org/housing/study-says-boosting-h... https://www.upjohn.org/research-highlights/new-construction-makes-homes-more-affordable-even-those-who-cant-afford-new-units https://www.upjohn.org/research-highlights/new-construction-...

PaulDavisThe1st 2y ago
> You are disregarding supply and demand because it's not a 100% bullet-proof model I didn't any suggestion to "disregard" the "law of supply and demand". I saw a suggestion that whatever kind of "law" this is, it is a very different kind of thing than a law of physics, to which a comparison was being made. > Any model that tries to predict human behaviour will be imperfect, we all know that. Yet we can rarely even bound the actual scale of the imperfection, so discussing "laws" of economics as if they are in some way similar to the law of gravity seems a little silly.
- airstrike 2y ago
  It's not different, it just has more parameters
cyberax 2y ago
> You are disregarding supply and demand because it's not a 100% bullet-proof model OK. Can you provide me just one example of a large city that reduced the housing sale prices by building more dense units? Not by crashing its economy or otherwise decreasing the population. If your model is correct, there should be at least _some_ examples. > There is evidence that building more reduces prices. There is none. Your studies are basically nonsense. Here's the strongest result: > One study cited in her report found that the average new apartment building lowers nearby rents by 5 percent to 7 percent “relative to the trend rent growth otherwise would have followed” Translation: the prices grew, but we managed to P-hack a small subset of data that shows at least _some_ effect. They could not find actual _decreases_ and had to resort to "would have beens". There's an overview article (that also contains the links to the study mentioned in your link): https://furmancenter.org/files/Supply_Skepticism_-_Final.pdf https://furmancenter.org/files/Supply_Skepticism_-_Final.pdf - feel free to look for the evidence for the failure of the "just build more".

lottin 2y ago

All the law of supply and demand says is that the market will reach an equilibrium where the quantity demanded equals the quantity supplied, and that such quantities as well as the equilibrium price are determined jointly by supply and demand. It doesn't say that the demand and supply curves are unmovable or that they have a particular slope.

kubb 2y ago
In this form, the law can’t be used to draw relevant conclusions about urban planning. It’s also demonstrably false, as the demand and supply never perfectly match.
- sieabahlpark 2y ago
  [dead]
- lottin 2y ago
  The immediate conclusion is that if there's an excess demand prices will go up in order to reach a new equilibrium. And this exactly what seems to be happening in the housing market.
  - toyg 2y ago
    Price equilibrium is a myth, in practice it's never observed. The reality is inflation, because the greed of man is unbound.
    - appreciatorBus 2y ago
      If greed of man is unbound, how come computers, TV's and airplane tickets are so much cheaper than decades previously? The idea that people involved in housing are some how uniquely greedy has a long history and it's just wrong. People who own housing - homeowners & landowners - are able to be more greedy than others because they are part of a cartel. The debate over housing reform & housing supply is about whether or not enforcing that cartel should be a government function.

freefaler 2y ago

> Newtonian physics is a model approximating reality, but it breaks down if you analyze cases that can be safely ignored for many engineering purposes, like traveling at high speeds. It's a very good approximation and there are special cases that it doesn't work. But for a practical human life-scale reality almost all of daily use technology is based on these laws. Does the supply/demand work in all situations? No, you need to have a at least some resemblance of a free market to let the market forces work. The reasons we know that this law is working are not only empirical understanding (try selling your laptop on ebay and you'll empirically understand why) but there were at least 2 testing approaches that validated it: 1) Experimental validation via: - Market simulation: Repeated trading rounds (Chamberlin, Smith) show prices converging to equilibrium when participants learn from prior outcomes. Public price data accelerates this process. - Policy tests: Lab experiments confirm tax/price controls create predictable shortages (e.g., rent controls reducing housing availability). 2) Modeling approaches: - Random coefficients logit models: Isolate price-quantity relationships by controlling for unobserved factors like brand loyalty. - Industry analyses: Cement and airline markets demonstrate markup adjustments aligning with supply-demand predictions under competition. - Instrumental variables: Cost shifters (e.g., raw material prices) validate causal price-quantity responses. > It’s weird that people try to explain the world with supply and demand as if everyone else was an idiot who doesn’t understand simple truths about the world, while in reality they are the ones who doesn’t appreciate the complexity of things like urban development. This is a strange argument. So basically the supply/demand curve works, but there are some consequences if you change the supply. Yes, they are. But if you want to have cheaper housing you will not save it if you don't build more even if there are other negatives from increased supply. And yes, urban development might be complicated, but the basics of "people need to live somewhere" is not. You might get favelas like in Brazil, but if your city grows and you don't build, because the people in the government and landlords get squeeze more profit from the market the problem will not be solved.

atmosx 2y ago

> Do they teach this to you guys in school? Many people religiously believe it. Well, up until 2008, that was common wisdom. Post-2008? Anyone still pushing that line won’t get far. In this case, that must be the free part of OP’s nickname speaking, right before the faler kicks in.