4 ms·

"Educate yourself" is almost always a shibboleth that the speaker of the phrase actually doesn't even know how to explain it to someone. It is a phrase of moral

"Educate yourself" is almost always a shibboleth that the speaker of the phrase actually doesn't even know how to explain it to someone. It is a phrase of moral superiority and is not interested in whether the other person actually educates themselves or not. Or they might educate themselves and come to the opposite conclusion as you, in which case, maybe you should have educated (or indoctrinated) them first. https://www.persuasion.community/p/why-i-refuse-to-educate-myself https://www.persuasion.community/p/why-i-refuse-to-educate-m...

intended 5mo ago
The user in question, begins with assumptions on how wealth and markets work that do not match anything I know of in economics. At one point they say that in a market economy there is no theft. At another point they say that wealth concentration does not occur. To begin to explain how they are working, I would have to invest in understanding the specific ideological framework they are using. Then figure out how to translate normal terms into their model. This is a degree of care and effort I spend on people I love and care deeply about. There is a threshold after which “educate yourself” is a genuine and reasonable statement, because the average person does not have the above average capability required to disentangle the motivated reasoning of a commenter.
- WalterBright 5mo ago
  > The user in question, begins with assumptions on how wealth and markets work that do not match anything I know of in economics. I'm not surprised. My dad taught free market economics as a professor in his later years. Students would come up to him shocked that there was a case for free markets. May I recommend any of Milton Friedman's books. Or "Capitalism" by Reisman. https://www.amazon.com/Capitalism-Treatise-Economics-Vol-1/dp/1931089639/ https://www.amazon.com/Capitalism-Treatise-Economics-Vol-1/d... > in a market economy there is no theft A free market economy is based on no force or fraud, and the government's job is to enforce that. > wealth concentration does not occur. Correct, in a free market.
  - satvikpendem 5mo ago
    I broadly agree with you, but do you believe the US has a free market? With regulatory capture and other ways to influence politics to favor one corporation over another, I don't think it fully does.

intended 5mo ago

The user in question, begins with assumptions on how wealth and markets work that do not match anything I know of in economics. At one point they say that in a market economy there is no theft. At another point they say that wealth concentration does not occur. To begin to explain how they are working, I would have to invest in understanding the specific ideological framework they are using. Then figure out how to translate normal terms into their model. This is a degree of care and effort I spend on people I love and care deeply about. There is a threshold after which “educate yourself” is a genuine and reasonable statement, because the average person does not have the above average capability required to disentangle the motivated reasoning of a commenter.

WalterBright 5mo ago
> The user in question, begins with assumptions on how wealth and markets work that do not match anything I know of in economics. I'm not surprised. My dad taught free market economics as a professor in his later years. Students would come up to him shocked that there was a case for free markets. May I recommend any of Milton Friedman's books. Or "Capitalism" by Reisman. https://www.amazon.com/Capitalism-Treatise-Economics-Vol-1/dp/1931089639/ https://www.amazon.com/Capitalism-Treatise-Economics-Vol-1/d... > in a market economy there is no theft A free market economy is based on no force or fraud, and the government's job is to enforce that. > wealth concentration does not occur. Correct, in a free market.
- satvikpendem 5mo ago
  I broadly agree with you, but do you believe the US has a free market? With regulatory capture and other ways to influence politics to favor one corporation over another, I don't think it fully does.