Message from @Platinum Spark

Discord ID: 619540267816452116


2019-09-06 06:53:19 UTC  

<:epic:583660735402475563>

2019-09-06 12:22:24 UTC  

It is not an ad hominem. That is an honest assessment of your argument.

2019-09-06 12:23:33 UTC  

You have not provided a source that answers my question. Why are you unable to answer it?

2019-09-06 12:25:12 UTC  

What words would you like me to use that you will not feel is an ad hominem m, to express the fact that you are mischaracterizing what supply and demand means, either willfully or through lack of understanding?

2019-09-06 12:26:59 UTC  

Your pointing to a source that does NOT address my question is not a satisfactory answer. Do YOU have an answer, do YOU understand it? This is an economics debate forum, can you lay out your argument rhetorically?

2019-09-06 12:38:52 UTC  

@Acacia poor? oo

2019-09-06 12:45:51 UTC  

kinda

2019-09-06 12:45:59 UTC  

you need money?

2019-09-06 12:46:00 UTC  
2019-09-06 12:46:09 UTC  

sure

2019-09-06 12:46:26 UTC  

-_-

2019-09-06 12:46:30 UTC  

then work @Acacia

2019-09-06 12:46:38 UTC  

ok

2019-09-06 14:29:45 UTC  

@Green Syndicalism again, let’s walk through this

2019-09-06 14:30:13 UTC  

Labor supply curves: you did not provide a labor supply curve. You provided an efficiency curve for ONE INDIVIDUAL

2019-09-06 14:30:33 UTC  

But when you increase the amount of labor you’re using, you don’t just make your existing workforce work more hours

2019-09-06 14:30:37 UTC  

You hire more people

2019-09-06 14:30:56 UTC  

So yes, if you tell one person to work 16 hours a day, they will decrease efficiency

2019-09-06 14:31:14 UTC  

But you can hire another 8 hour worker without that decrease in efficiency

2019-09-06 14:31:33 UTC  

This is so obvious I have to believe you’re being disingenuous.

2019-09-06 14:31:50 UTC  

B) “empirical evidence from firms themselves”

2019-09-06 14:31:58 UTC  

Yes, individual firms cannot produce infinitely

2019-09-06 14:32:35 UTC  

This is why, in the aggregate, supply curves are typically drawn with a steeper curve on the right side

2019-09-06 14:33:56 UTC  

Because as you get to the total upward limits of production of the market as a whole, increases in price still can’t produce infinite more goods

2019-09-06 14:34:37 UTC  

If the prices stay at that level though, people will open new factories and invest in new technologies, which is why long term curves are different than short term curves

2019-09-06 14:35:49 UTC  

Your own source SUPPORTS the way supply curves are drawn

2019-09-06 14:36:05 UTC  

c) of course supply curves exist. You’re not even proposing that they don’t.

2019-09-06 14:41:56 UTC  

I read your source. Please explain what zero he’s talking about in this section:

2019-09-06 14:41:58 UTC  

Conversely, neoclassical economists love the market structure they call ‘perfect competition,’ because it guarantees that profit­maximizing behavior will cause firms to produce an output at which marginal cost equals price.
Only it won’t. The manner in which neoclassical economics derives the result that profit­maximizing behavior by competitive firms means that they will produce where marginal cost equals price commits one of the simplest mathematical mistakes possible: it confuses a very small quantity – an ‘in­ finitesimal,’ as mathematicians describe it – with zero.
When that error is corrected, it is easily shown that a competitive market will also set price above marginal cost, and therefore a supply curve that is independent of the demand curve can’t be drawn. The other half of the ‘Totem of the Micro’ disappears.

2019-09-06 14:44:22 UTC  

Based

2019-09-06 15:03:11 UTC  

<:GWjiangoNoice:402866539491229696>

2019-09-06 15:04:56 UTC  

I’d add that when he says “the supply curve doesn’t exist” what he’s saying is that a large majority of supply firms are price takers

2019-09-06 15:05:36 UTC  

So he’s saying that the shape of the supply curve is dependent on the shape of the demand curve, not that the supply curve literally doesn’t exist

2019-09-06 15:05:48 UTC  

He says that in his book

2019-09-06 15:28:51 UTC  

Tl;dr

2019-09-06 15:29:00 UTC  

Sophesticated says to have sex

2019-09-06 15:29:07 UTC  

Sex is a demand and supply curve

2019-09-06 15:35:38 UTC  

Yup he’s got it

2019-09-07 00:27:03 UTC  

@Dr.Cosby every counterargument she made literally ignored the points of mine

2019-09-07 00:28:55 UTC  

she thinks the labour supply curve bending backwards was about efficiency of your labour, when it was actually about how higher wages bring enough happiness that you feel less inclination to supply your labour, *this isnt actually what economists mean by efficiency, which is to do with pareto equilibria measurements*. its very easy to conflate these as equivalent, but even if you suppose they were equivalent, this is still a supply curve and if you aggregate the market you will still get a backward bending curve, so its direct evidence for my point. Again though, to focus on this tiny microcosm instead of addressing the fundamental issues behind the model is a bit absurd in the face of all its other problems, this is a very minor issue to contend with in comparison

2019-09-07 00:30:18 UTC  

her reasoning about the upward curvature of a supply curve is that it must bend upwards due to increasing marginal costs, but i provided a study that showed firms have decreasing marginal costs, and perhaps at infinity they all must bend upward, but we dont operate at infinity, we operate at 80% capacity at most, so any real world supply curve would not show strictly upward curvature, there would be kinks *at the minimum* but most of the time it would curve flat or downwards