Would you play a pre-recorded set at a live event...

[mostapha]

[Killing time]

HERE IS ONE LAST post, srrrry, but not sorry. kinda buzzed last night.

i claimed social science was the science of human behavior, not economics.



what something is worth isn't the actual dollar amount, its what it costs. If i want buy a used iphone on craigslist, i will find that there are hundereds of listings for iphones in various flavors and conditions. they're also priced accordingly. me, as a buyer, already have an idea about what an Iphone is worth to me. I find one and see that i can get an unlocked pristine conditioned Iphone 5 for 200 dollars. is that iphone 5 worth 200 dollars? well, im sure to someone else that iphone 5 is worth less because they do not like apple products. you could only sell that iphone 5 to that person that dislikes apple products for only 50 dollars. a dollar amount has nothing to do with that product is worth, its the cost. and that cost is based upon what you value something.

now lets take an example where you don't get a durable product, but a domestic product. lets say gardening service.

You are a CPA. You have a front yard with a few bushes, flowers, and a tree that could use a little trim. your neighbor, ted, runs a gardening service that needs some help filing taxes this coming april. Ted typically charges 50 dollars to do a trim a front yard.
You usually charge 100 dollars to help file taxes. This is awesome, you two can do a trade, but you don't think your services are worth 50 dollars, you think they're worth 100. however, because you're an upstanding tax man you don't believe in helping other businesses that don't collect a formal taxes, which are far easier to find and hire to do your gardening. There are other services in your town, but Ted is your neighbor that you're willing to pay your neighbor a little more as well. You feel that this is an ok trade, and you commit to doing his taxes in trade for his services on your front porch

the cost wasn't 50 or a 100 dollars, it was two services that were valued differently by you the individual. a dollar doesn't have any meaning if there isn't a cost involved, which is the abstract concept i wasn't to articulate. a dollar doesn't mean anything, cost means everything. and payment isn't a dollar, its the cost.

a dollar is just a perferred payment option because of its high liquidity, and people have a dollar sign attached to everything.

im going to call into work sick today because i would rather watch the baseball game. what did that cost you? if you work a job at a wage, it actually cost you a days worth of work, ontop of the expenses for a baseball game. but you did it anyways because thats the price of your happiness. it maximized your utility.





here are some basic explanations that help prove my point. You can't argue against these basic ideas, this isn't a macro issue. we're not talking about business cycles, inflation, or unemployment. we're talking about basic human interaction and choices, which you all subconsciously do everyday.

you choosing to move kitties vs run them over is a choice of physically moving the kitties (which makes you happy) lower than running them over (which would make you unhappy). you are literally pricing two things based on what makes you happy, vs what doesn't make you happy. which is what is expected of everyone, you would rather do something that makes you happy vs something that makes you unhappy.

and to refute your point about economics and mathematical models, most of the theories that use math much easier to break than the models that dont. i know what a histogram looks like, i know how to run regressions, and i know how to look at a matrix, and most of the stuff they teach in the B.S. program here at school is worthless because a lot of the mathematical models do a great job at explaining nothing.

[ImNoDJ]

HERE IS ONE LAST post, srrrry, but not sorry. kinda buzzed last night.

i claimed social science was the science of human behavior, not economics.

You were very clearly inferring it as mostaphas post shows. Pretending otherwise is just painful for everyone. You are unable to concede a single point, even when you are proven incorrect.

what something is worth isn't the actual dollar amount, its what it costs................

Oh my god. No one is struggling to understand opportunity cost. Personally, I understand it just fine and I just disagree with you.

You can't argue against these basic ideas, this isn't a macro issue. we're not talking about business cycles, inflation, or unemployment. we're talking about basic human interaction and choices, which you all subconsciously do everyday.

Yes I can. Please provide a reference to peer reviewed experimental studies that demonstrate the mechanism you are talking about, in the specific context of performing artists and selling out.

Ive also studied Psych. Psychology does not pretend to be able to predict or explain the vast number of human behaviour and choices. What they have shown is the product of painstaking research. Economics is not better at predicting behaviour than behavioural psychology.

You can't argue against these basic ideas, this isn't a macro issue.

Appeals to authority/consensus do not help your argument in any way.

[SirReal]

If time is money and money can't buy happiness, then it stands to reason the time I wasted reading this thread did not make me happy.

[Goingvinyl123]

Where's the fun in that?

[mostapha]

HERE IS ONE LAST post, srrrry, but not sorry. kinda buzzed last night.

Nothing in this post has anything to do with the argument we're (apparently still) having.

You claimed that you could pay anyone to do anything. I gave examples of things no one could pay me to do. You have not refuted my examples.

At no point did I say it wasn't possible to coerce me into doing them, but that's not a transfer of money, goods or services. The fact that I can get coerced into doing those things might actually support my point, that some thing are more valuable than any amount of money, feasible or not.

At no point did I give any indication that I don't understand the extremely basic economics you keep trying to explain for no reason.

And at no point have you said anything relevant to the argument.

I'll claim the win on behalf of logic and real science(TM).

Ive also studied Psych. Psychology does not pretend to be able to predict or explain the vast number of human behaviour and choices. What they have shown is the product of painstaking research. Economics is not better at predicting behaviour than behavioural psychology.

Psychology claims to study the mechanisms and to make predictions based on changing stimuli or conditions. And it does it remarkably well, all things considered. Absolute predictions are just not possible since all brains (at a biochemical level) are probabilistic in nature anyway. That alone eliminates the possibility of perfect prediction.

If time is money and money can't buy happiness, then it stands to reason the time I wasted reading this thread did not make me happy.

[SirReal]

^^^^^^^^^^^

[Jester]

Jesus pose with your premixed gatecrasher cd in one hand, big flourish as you slam it into a cdj and press play. Then go full Peter Hook