4 ms·

If no one buys this car, making more of them will lose money until they stop. If consumers buy the car, then it will live on. In other words, CONSUMERS do not

If no one buys this car, making more of them will lose money until they stop. If consumers buy the car, then it will live on. In other words, CONSUMERS do not necessarily act in the interest of consumers.

mdp2021 1y ago
> consumers do not necessarily act in the interest of consumers That's what I am saying with "broken market, broken supply-demand system, non-rational and non-informed economic agents". Bad products that sell are a reality since a long time.
- tjwebbnorfolk 1y ago
  Broken for whom? "Bad" according to whom? What would your goal be, then? Only "good" products are able to be sold -- according to whom will this definition of "good" be decided? I'm mainly playing devil's advocate here, but my point is that bringing value judgement into other people's decisions is not something I would regard as rational. People have their own reasons for doing things that I don't need to understand.
  - mdp2021 1y ago
    > whom? Rational agents. That quality is an abater of relativism. > What would your goal be, then Livability. That requires working systems, so that choice is still possible. In the current situation, there is in many vast territories no choice, in many areas (not just cars), and greatly suboptimal, very thin livability.
    - tjwebbnorfolk 1y ago
      Let me know when you find one of these "rational agents". I'd love to meet an extraterrestrial alien made of silicon. Again, livability "for whom?" Do you propose making cheap, accessible beachfront property a basic human right? Should we all live in equally-sized apartments given to us for free by the government? People do not all want the same thing.
      - mdp2021 1y ago
        > Let me know when you find one of these "rational agents". Hi there. > Again, livability "for whom?" For the rational. The people who tend to dis-want electroshocking cutlery and miasmatic nail polish. > Do you propose That societies work on making citizens informed and rational, just like classic economic theory suggested and as is required for the common advantage.
  - amelius 1y ago
    If you are basing your metrics on the same bad axioms a system was built on, you will not understand the other side of the story.
amelius 1y ago
This assumes that consumers have perfect information, that products never change in favor of the vendor (enshittification), limited choice of products, and ignores the power of quasi monopolies. Also ignores persuasion tactics which have great power, see The Internet.
ozgrakkurt 1y ago
If your choice is to get beaten or get sick then you can’t act in your interest.

mdp2021 1y ago

> consumers do not necessarily act in the interest of consumers That's what I am saying with "broken market, broken supply-demand system, non-rational and non-informed economic agents". Bad products that sell are a reality since a long time.

tjwebbnorfolk 1y ago
Broken for whom? "Bad" according to whom? What would your goal be, then? Only "good" products are able to be sold -- according to whom will this definition of "good" be decided? I'm mainly playing devil's advocate here, but my point is that bringing value judgement into other people's decisions is not something I would regard as rational. People have their own reasons for doing things that I don't need to understand.
- mdp2021 1y ago
  > whom? Rational agents. That quality is an abater of relativism. > What would your goal be, then Livability. That requires working systems, so that choice is still possible. In the current situation, there is in many vast territories no choice, in many areas (not just cars), and greatly suboptimal, very thin livability.
  - tjwebbnorfolk 1y ago
    Let me know when you find one of these "rational agents". I'd love to meet an extraterrestrial alien made of silicon. Again, livability "for whom?" Do you propose making cheap, accessible beachfront property a basic human right? Should we all live in equally-sized apartments given to us for free by the government? People do not all want the same thing.
    - mdp2021 1y ago
      > Let me know when you find one of these "rational agents". Hi there. > Again, livability "for whom?" For the rational. The people who tend to dis-want electroshocking cutlery and miasmatic nail polish. > Do you propose That societies work on making citizens informed and rational, just like classic economic theory suggested and as is required for the common advantage.
- amelius 1y ago
  If you are basing your metrics on the same bad axioms a system was built on, you will not understand the other side of the story.

amelius 1y ago

This assumes that consumers have perfect information, that products never change in favor of the vendor (enshittification), limited choice of products, and ignores the power of quasi monopolies. Also ignores persuasion tactics which have great power, see The Internet.

ozgrakkurt 1y ago

If your choice is to get beaten or get sick then you can’t act in your interest.