The problem with marginalism, and with economists is that I can’t take their explanations seriously when they don’t actually explain scarcity. They define or infer scarcity from the very price relationship that scarcity is supposed to explain. That’s just circular reasoning.
@cha_ganthiya >“Production conditions do influence the supply side”
Very stupid conclusion to draw from what I said. This is exactly why I told you to read something first rather than debate. I can already tell you haven’t read much.
@cha_ganthiya which makes the reasoning circular. Also, the thermometer example literally shows that you didn’t understand what I was trying to say, which points to you not having read about any of this.
@cha_ganthiya Scarcity doesn’t really generate prices. Prices emerge from the objective conditions that determine how a product is produced. This is the part that the price mechanism doesn’t account for, yet it tries to infer those underlying conditions from prices themselves,
@sigmahamster2@_Credible_Hulk That’s not really what they talk about there tho. In the first chapter, they praise capitalism; in the second, they clarify what the proletariat & communism are; in the third, they attack the leftists for being stupid; and in the fourth, they emphasize class struggle throughout.
Economists can make really good and convincing arguments, but the moment they start bringing up marginalism and shit like that, my respect for them drops a level pretty quickly.
@sigmahamster2 Profit is an incentive that motivates people to push further, but if you really think humanity would have no reason to innovate or progress without that incentive, I don’t even know what to tell you.