This is why cake shops display the visual experience of their cake rather than giving you the other experiences as well.

Maybe for you but that's a personal preference

IF you really care about the smell, buy cake perfume.

The olfactory experience in a cake shop is a pretty big factor too I'd say

I am appealing to the free market majority.

ONLY RELEVANT CAKE FEATURE IS TASTE

I understand that you as a communist may not understand how the free market works, but it is an amazing tool that allocates resources and preference to the highest ability.

So what you're saying is, you don't really care about having your cake and eating it too, you just want to look at a picture of it and eat it too.

As stated the visual experience ***Is*** the cake.

I fundamentally reject this assertion, but you're free to have that opinion I guess.

Btw, here's $100 USD, don't spend it all in one place.

yeah that's crazy it might be what get's you to buy the cake but if that would be the case why would anyone eat cake

HALO IS OUT

1. Free House
2. Free food
3. Free water
4. Free Nintendo 64s with Super Mario 64

those are my politics

Shit, I'd vote for you

If you add internet to that you also got my vote

nostalgia <a:PepeLaughers:641807253128740865>

@Deleted User Hey you brought back my favorite profile pic of yours 😄

> I understand that you as a communist may not understand how the free market works, but it is an amazing tool that allocates resources and preference to the highest ability.
no it's highest bidder cus the def for demand if *the willingness and ability to buy a good/service*

@Revolutionaryarmchair Whats the argument for that?

Therefore whenever you raise prices and the quantity demanded drops, you basically exclude access cus this is often due to high prices acting a barrier to purchase

wtf this is like neo classical

not weird neo wickesslian shit or something

Can you prove demand drops and not just purchases.

you mean a shift in the curve?

Yea prove that an increase in prices drops demand by a significant amount, and not just purchases.

cus the problem with economic *allocative efficiency* under a market is that it presumes that wealth/purchasing power is kinda equal

> Yea prove that an increase in prices drops demand by a significant amount, and not just purchases.
quantity demanded

quantity demanded is a particular point affected by a change in the firm/firms'/supplier's price

Can you cite an actual study or data set and not just a drawn together graph with no backing.

Also this graph does not have anything to do with the demand claim.

are you trolling?

me>

?

wait is someone trying to say that markets allocate resources efficiently?

<a:OMEGAROLL:629486397673439262>

```Results indicate that mandatory (voluntary) prescriptive policies focused on outdoor watering restrictions achieve approximately a ten percent (three percent) reduction in aggregate demand. Given the inelastic price responsiveness of households, an average price increase of more than 30% would be required to achieve the same ten percent reduction in water use that the prescriptive mandatory policies achieved. This price increase would imply a 20 percent increase in the average customer’s monthly expenditures on water. ```

water is ofc inelastic in PED cus you know

not very much substitutes for water....