sjolsen & @sjolsen@tech.lgbt
Kspacewalk2 13 minutes ago | prev | next [-] fwo economists are walking in a forest when they come across a pile of shit. The first economist says to the other “I’ll pay you $100 to eat that pile of shit.” The second economist takes the $100 and eats the pile of shit. They continue walking until they come across a second pile of shit. The second economist turns to the first and says “Ill pay you $100 to eat that pile of shit.” The first economist takes the $100 and eats a pile of shit. Walking a little more, the first economist looks at the second and says, “You know, I gave you $100 to eat shit, then you gave me back the same $100 to eat shit. I can’t help but feel like we both just ate shit for nothing.” “That’s not true”, responded the second economist. “We increased the GDP by $200!” 16 Sept 2023, 20:45 530 17
You must log in or # to comment.
Not going to disagree that GDP is a bad measure of economic productivity, but, theoretically, in this case both the economists also got utility by enjoying themselves by paying the other to see them eat excrement. Assuming humans to be rational, it could be argued that there was a net gain of utility (if 100 $ is worth more than what you lose from eating excrement) or at least remained the same, since the buyers considered the entertainment they get to be worth at least 100 $ and that the service providers considered their service to be worth less than 100 $).
But now I feel stupid for writing this.
The whole assuming humans to be rational part is what messes up the calculation.
The core of capitalist economics relies on two things: perfect knowledge and rational people. I believe capitalism can work in so far as we have those two things.
So only in our dreams. Got it
Well, it turns out they’re nightmares at the moment, but yes, basically.
Sort of like a for-profit healthcare system will work if it relies on two things: everyone can afford insurance and everyone is very healthy.
There just need to be enough people to cover the costs of the unhealthy.
Good thing that’s something that can be calculated and prepared for.
Statistics don’t lie, and you always need a buffer.
That’s why it works pretty well in Europe. At least in Czechia, but should be about the same in the other countries.
What statistics would those be?
And that the enjoyment of seeing the other person eating shit is more than the negative experience of doing it yourself
But now I feel stupid for writing this.
Don’t stop now, keep going and you’ll be writing financial regulations in no time!
If this data gets sucked into a model it may be ingrained into future law students papers everywhere eventually.
The mistake is in thinking people would only pay money for things they will enjoy. This is self reinforcing; people will believe they enjoyed something more if they have been told it is more expensive. What if that’s a false belief? What if the economists were paying each other purely out of spite and enjoyed nothing? Desire and pleasure are separate and it’s possible to have the former fulfilled with none of the latter.
I kind of thought that was the point of this. There are many ways to increase GDP or gain ‘utility’ through how we use our money, but most of it is just shit. Capitalism values anything that can do this regardless of any other sense of value.
Assuming humans to be rational, it could be argued that there was a net gain of utility (if 100 $ is worth more than what you lose from eating excrement) or at least remained the same, since the buyers considered the entertainment they get to be worth at least 100 $ and that the service providers considered their service to be worth less than 100 $).
Counterpoint: If humans were rational, they would not find it entertaining to watch people eat excrement.
deleted by creator
I immediately remembered this comic: https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2013-01-14
That was excellent, thanks for sharing lol
I hope they each paid income tax on those earnings!
Yes if done legally, they both just paid the government so they could watch someone else eat shit.
There’s the “shit-eater loophole” so they don’t have to.
Only if they report the 100$ as income and pay tax on it.
FTS will hunt their asses and freeze their actives
Also they got to see someone eat a pile of shit. Worth it.
Were they morally right to eat shit? No, but then there is no ethical consumption under capitalism.
GDP is worse metric than defference of average color in image compression
Cool now I imagine an economist wearing a shit-eating grin saying, “Do I look like I know what a JPEG is?”
Difference of average color is so cringe even for JPEG-1, that encoders use at least PSNR(which is still shitty) or sometimes SSIM. There are other metrics like butteraguli too.
This is a bit misleading.
Two communists walk through the woods. One has $100. The other shoots him for the $100 and buys a a bag of shit from the community store to feed his family. Such is life.
Come on you can do better.
I get you’re a troll account trying to get a rise out of people but you can at least try to be funny while you’re baiting people.
you are getting very close to self awareness buddy. You can do it!
Removed by mod
This is the dumbest shit I’ve ever read in my life. Read books.
“Meh, books are woke”
-that guy, probably
Are you assuming I dont read books because I made a joke you didnt like? Wow, you must be insufferable to be that quick of judgement.
No, i assume you don’t read because you made ignorant statements.
Genocide denier fuck off. 🖕
Go larp somewhere else, I blocked your ass.
🙄
Do you think this joke is more or less “ignorant” than the OP?
They’re both jokes man.
Maybe not, but it is damn well more funny since it actually has a punch line instead of being nothing but criticism.
You made a joke literally nobody would like, because it was a shit joke. “Trolling” hasn’t been a thing in 20 years, get on with the times.
Comedy is hard.
