• chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    9 months ago

    This falsely assumes that economic actors necessarily have sound judgment about value. Imagine someone who has had a bad day at work going and spending $10 for the privilege of being rude to a fast food clerk. If given the option would they directly trade the humiliations they themselves endured to earn that money to be able to inflict the same? Probably not, but their workday is already over, they don’t see a way to translate the cash they have onhand into an overall better life, and this is what they feel like doing in the moment.

    • bort@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      This falsely assumes that economic actors necessarily have sound judgment about value

      Does this matter in the context of this post? I.e. are GDPs “the sum of shit people pay for” or do they get adjusted for “sound judgment of value”?

      • chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        Increase in GDP is very often assumed to be a positive thing and represent an improvement in society, and as far as I can tell the point of the joke is that this is a false assumption.

        • Socsa@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          I mean sure, in this contrived scenario. If a major source of GDP for some country was literally taking turns eating shit, that country would have some serious issues for sure. Fortunately, GDP isn’t the only useful metric of economic output.