/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.53710055]

Is the entire economy is simply an expression of energy extraction and usage?

[Anonymous No.53710092]

>>53710055
Si

[Anonymous No.53710127]

>>53710055
Yes

[Anonymous No.53710129]

>>53710055
no its supply and demand. the amount of energy it takes doesnt matter, this is what antiwork redditor types have trouble understanding. playing the auction house in a game like world of warcraft can help you understand, if you are the only person selling bronze then you can set the price to what ever you want, someone may undercut you or maybe your price is still to high and despite being the only source no one wants to pay that much

[Anonymous No.53710210]

It can be understood that way. The way it's set up energy producers get at least a few pennies on every dollar anyone anywhere makes. Once you realize this though, there's no looking away from it.

[Anonymous No.53710481]

>>53710129
But demand is also price dependent. If the energy cost of producing and delivering it is too high, you won't have any customers willing to pay.

[Anonymous No.53710541]

>>53710481
only because people know someone else will start producing more so they are willing to wait it out for a better price.

[Anonymous No.53710572]

>>53710541
If the production costs have a floor based on energy price, how will someone else produce more?

[Anonymous No.53710588]

>>53710572
They don't until a competing form of alternative energy comes around. Why do you think there's such a shill campaign built around getting you to fucking hate solar panels and wind turbines?

[Anonymous No.53710644]

>>53710588
But those alternative sources are even more expensive.

[Anonymous No.53710689]

>>53710572
maybe they figured out a more efficient way to do it. your example doesnt really make sense, did you make a thousand diamond barbeques that each cost a billion dollars to make and then you found out no one is going to buy it? you lose money if you are not selling your product, you are paying workers to stand around and do nothing, and you are renting out a warehouse to store the product, and also you didnt have any money to begin with you took out a loan you have to pay back, so your only option is to lower your price to recoup some money even if you are selling for less than it cost to produce.

[Anonymous No.53710724]

>>53710644
You've fallen for it.

>>53710129
What you've entirely missed is that if almost every profitable activity in the economy has a demand for energy, then the economy can be understood as an aggregate for energy demand. OP at least gets that much, and you're stuck on freshman econ 101 and world of warcraft auction house.

[Anonymous No.53710772]

>>53710055
reminder that boston dynamics has a fusion reactor that fits on a truck bed

[Anonymous No.53710825]

>>53710772
As far as I can tell now that his brother is dead Koch's next big thing is nuclear. And no, they haven't cracked cold fusion yet.

[Anonymous No.53710826]

>>53710724
Make an actual argument
>>53710689
>maybe they figured out a more efficient way to do it
Yes and maybe magic energy pixies gift us workable, cheap fusion energy.
If nobody wants to buy your product at a price where it's profitable for you to produce it, there's no market and the product isn't made.

[Anonymous No.53710920]

>>53710826
You are seeing that the economy is functionally an aggregate of demand for energy, and that virtually every activity on any scale worth talking about within that economy runs on energy. It isn't hard to imagine what this means. A massive global cartel that counts megacorporations, oligarchs, dictators, and kings sets the price and reaps the profit for virtually every activity in the world. This is easy to understand and extrapolate from what you already understand.

The part that you're stuck on is that in order to defend this global, all encompassing enterprise that they've created a massive propaganda machine using just a drop of that wealth. Part of what it does is convince you that no viable alternatives to their products exist.

Solar panels are so easy to make that I could literally cook up a small one in my garage for a few bucks. You are convinced that it's impossible for such a thing to be done feasibly at scale and demand that I "prove" that it could be done. I'm telling you that it's impossible for you to conceive of any such thing because the very thing that you've realized exists has spent a tremendous amount of resources biasing you against the idea that such a thing is possible.

Some of those same channels of disinformation are going to start selling you on the idea of nuclear energy because the last Koch has always had a stiffy for nuclear since he was a young man.

[Anonymous No.53710943]

>>53710826
try thinking of a real world example. why would someone bother making and trying to sell something when its too expensive to produce?
If everyone needs a eating utensils, I might produce and sell silverware. But someone else may decide to make it cheaply out of wood. But then later someone might be able to mass produce spoons from a factory using stainless steel.
Or if i am drilling oil in the middle of the ocean to sell to people, but someone else finds a doposit closer to the shore and thus its cheaper for them to ship oil.
its all supply and demand. i dont even know what your argument is

[Anonymous No.53710958]

>>53710092
stfu disgusting spic

[Anonymous No.53711143]

>>53710055
Yes, the economy relies on almost sole energy to function. Abundant energy permits the use of machines to increase productivity (so, revenues), but the contrary is true as well.

[Anonymous No.53711159]

>>53710920
I'm with you till the second paragraph, but if solar panels were so easy and cheap to make, people would figure that out and make them. The profit motive would be immense.
I can conceive of the powers that be fooling us. That's easy enough after covid started. I can't conceive of is that nobody would grasp the opportunity.

>>53710943
Okay but you're talking about replacing a product with another product. The point was that the original product is no longer being produced because there's no gap between the manufacturing costs and the ability for the customer to pay to fit a market into.

[Anonymous No.53711174]

>>53711159
>The point was that the original product is no longer being produced because there's no gap between the manufacturing costs and the ability for the customer to pay to fit a market into.
Please give one real world example of this because this makes no sense. What product does everyone need that can't be created anymore?

[Anonymous No.53711212]

So invest in energy etfs?

[Anonymous No.53711290]

>>53711159
I know you're with me until the second paragraph. Because people have worked very hard to insure that the second paragraph is where you get lost. You can believe in the idea of the entire covid thing being a hoax perpetuated by all of the governments of the world, every major corporation in existence, and all of medical and biological science lying to you for nonsensical reasons because of some shadowy conspiracy that was confabulated in some propagandist's design room, but you cannot conceive of the idea of an oil cartel suppressing potential competitors.

That is the power that the propagandists have over you. You literally cannot conceive of ideas that they do not wish you to be able to conceive of, and you believe wholeheartedly in ideas that motivate you to do things that they wish you to do.

[Anonymous No.53711325]

>>53710055
The energy comes from the goyim slaves, we live in a slave world that farms and steals our energy for the empowerment of the Jewish elite because Jews don’t want to do physical labour

[Anonymous No.53711950]

>>53711174
I'm not talking about products everyone needs, just products in general. Does it really not make sense that a given product's market simply vanishes when the cost of production is higher than what the customer is willing/able to pay?

>>53711290
>it's easy to get cheap energy
>but nobody does it
I have trouble with things that seem blatantly illogical. Explain how this works.

[Anonymous No.53711997]

>>53711950
It's only illogical if you make basic assumptions that you aren't even aware of. I can't meaningfully do anything except try to poke holes at the edges of your assumptions, but I realize that I'm doing this with someone who thinks that covid was a mass conspiracy but who also can't conceive of big oil strangling alternative energy in its crib every time someone somewhere gets something started.

Look into how solar panels are getting hit with punitive taxes in places like Arizona, and how various states are passing legislation to deliberately force houses with solar panels to take a loss selling energy back to the grid.

[Anonymous No.53712077]

>>53710055
Yes. If you chart every country by how much energy it uses and its per capita wealth it's basically 1:1. There is no such thing as a low energy usage rich country. Looking back historically basically all human advancement has coincided with increased energy usage.

[Anonymous No.53712146]

>>53711997
You're wrong that I can't conceive it, I just haven't seen enough evidence for it. But I haven't looked into it either.
It just seems that if it was so easy to make cheap panels, it would be hard to suppress that information so effectively. The covid narrative was absolutely full of holes from the very start. How is the energy narrative that much more effective?

[Anonymous No.53712198]

>>53710920
>so easy
You're mixing up easy and simple. Don't worry, it's a common mistake.
Based on your posts, of course you can make solar panels in your garage. It doesn't take a genius to make plenty of things.
Can you figure out how to make 100,000 panels a year? Now figure out how to make them with sub 1% defects. Now try panels where the performance doesn't fall off precipitously after a few years. Etc, etc, etc.
easy!=simple

[Anonymous No.53712460]

>>53712146
You're plugged into the propaganda so deep that you think covid was a hoax. Trying to convince you of something that you don't want to believe in when you won't even look into how solar panels are being suppressed is a waste of time.

>>53712198
Sure, making them at scale has
>checks notes
The same hurdles to overcome as literally making anything else at industrial scale.

[Anonymous No.53712511]

>>53712460
Where did I say that covid was a hoax?

[Anonymous No.53712526]

>>53712460
>you won't even look into how solar panels are being suppressed is a waste of time
You don't sound like an honest actor with things of substance to say.

[Anonymous No.53712628]

>>53710920
>I'm telling you that it's impossible for you to conceive of any such thing because the very thing that you've realized exists has spent a tremendous amount of resources biasing you against the idea that such a thing is possible
Cool. By the way, a secret all-powerful faction of the elite put THAT idea into your head, and convinced you that it was your own. They even seeded all of the "alt" parts of the internet that you get your info from, to make it seem like your ideas are more coherent and supported by freethinkers. And you ate it up, didn't you? What a smart little "intellectual" you are, playing with enthusiasm the role that you were handed. Look at you go.

[Anonymous No.53712739]

>>53712511
>>53712526
>>53712628
This is why propaganda machines are dangerous.

[Anonymous No.53712807]

>>53712460

[Anonymous No.53712858]

>>53710055
Vague question. What is an "expression"? What would it mean for "the economy" to not be an "expression of energy extraction and usage"? What is the utility of considering it an "expression of energy extraction and usage"?

[Anonymous No.53712969]

>>53710572
I take it from this you mean to suggest by "energy" that price-costs are determined by energy. But costs to produce things are variable based on labor costs, and the cost to reproduce an employee metabolically is largely arbitrary to their bargaining position in the economy. So the vast majority of conceivable price-costs are not determined by an "energy cost", so to speak. The price of energy itself is bargained over by different actors. In that framing there wouldn't be much explained by considering the actually existing economy as a function of energy costs. The costs of reproducing employees is arbitrary to their wage demands, one 6ft male employee that eats 2,500 calories a day costs more than another metabolically similar employee somewhere else doing the same job. Why? Because they live in the country with the big guns, among other things.

[Anonymous No.53712992]

>>53710588
>alternative energy
Should we tell him?

[Anonymous No.53713091]

>>53712992
How's that power grid?

[Anonymous No.53713133]

>the brainlets itt who don't understand that belief and its correspondent energy transformations are the source of all perceived economic value
i now completely understand the behavior of the people who rule this world

[Anonymous No.53713310]

>>53712739
All you have really said amounts you
>you can't even imagine the answer.
It's not an argument.

>>53712969
The calories burned by the worker aren't really relevant at all. Factories need energy to run. Raw materials need energy for extraction and processing and transport. Finished good need energy for transport. Workers need energy to (gas in their cars) to get to and from the job site. This forms the basic cost of operation. Without that energy, literally nothing happens physically. If the customer can't cover those costs, there is no business or market for a given good/service.

[Anonymous No.53713321]

>>53713310
*(calories are a very small part of this in modern industry)

[Anonymous No.53713398]

>>53710055
Close, its labour. Labour extraction and usage.

[Anonymous No.53713410]

>>53712077
>Looking back historically basically all human advancement has coincided with increased energy usage.
Thats because industrial revolutions (theres been multiple, going all the way back to cavemen days) are about energy productions and energy usage. Its not about machinery and factories, although thats what we immediately think of first.

[Anonymous No.53713491]

>>53713310
You don't pay machines, you pay people. People bargain over the value of themselves and their objects. You say "if the customer can't cover the costs", but the "costs" are both the profit and labor income. That's why economies are also measured by referring to national income accounts. Money terminates at people, and people have different values based on their bargaining positions. The fact the economy requires energy isn't useful in figuring out what the economy is doing or why it is shaped a certain way.

The economy is a complex system, and there are theories of complexity that already exist and implicate the economy. Those theories also implicate life itself, because they're often attempts to model all complex systems. Energy is specifically not important to them, because complex systems are black boxes where energy feeds into and seems to produce different forms. The existence of the sun can't give us a basis for understanding the various forms of complex systems that suck in the energy it feeds. In fact, that energy appears as "free", there is no price for solar energy. The actual question is how you look at these apparently free and indifferent resources and figure out how complexity emerges. Why does the energy the sun emits result in tigers, venus fly traps, squids the economy? They all need the sun to exist sure, but what can biologists and ecologists learn about organisms by just starting with "all organisms are expressions of solar energy"? And what can economists learn? Not much, that is why they directly study the systems they're interested in. Because the sun doesn't give adequate knowledge of a tiger, looking at the tiger and understanding particular patterns ofnits biology and environment does.

[Anonymous No.53713506]

are all software 1s and 0s?

Yes. Congratulations.

[Anonymous No.53713646]

>>53713491
Incidentally, before any snarky remark that solar energy from solar panels has a price, I mean that there is no monetary price to solar energy for organisms. Organisms don't pay the sun to be born, the sun actually specifically doesn't receive anything from us. It is its own complex system that is producing entropy, which feeds into earthly complex systems. But it goes one way, nobody pays the sun, ie the energy is "free". Monetary economies are a phenomenon of humans, specifically a phenomenon of our high degree of sociality. It is arguable that monetary economies start in bride prices, because there is anthropological and archeological evidence that early forms of exchange around "money-like" objects was a means of gatekeeping adulthood and familial relations. Powerful people would demand objects as a "price" for marriage, and they would possess the objects. Cowrie shells served this purpose for some coastal people, because they were very dangerous to dive for so they had two uses. They were scarce, so the powerful men could accrue the cowrie shells and control marriages and lucrative familial alliances, and they could culturally disseminate the idea that possessing cowrie shells was a sign of strength because they were dangerous to dive for. You could either dive for cowrie shells as a youth looking to marry, or you could earn them from the powerful men.

Another thing to note is that even in some of the earliest writings about money it was perceived that money was primarily commensurating people, it serves a social function. Aristotle said money was a way to commensurate the differences between different people. Money made it possible for people of different social strata and positions to meet at the interstices of their roles. The land owning aristocrat could meet the urban craftsman and come to agreements mediated by money, but the equality of the money was (and is) actually key to perpetuating the inequality of each social role.

[Anonymous No.53713692]

>>53713491
Machines still require money to buy, service and run. A machine that automates a given job can, in theory cost the same amount (or marginally less) than the worker it replaces. There's no functional difference in money terms.

>The fact the economy requires energy isn't useful in figuring out what the economy is doing or why it is shaped a certain way.
Never said it was, I just said that energy is the basis of the economy and there literally, physically IS NO ECONOMY without it. It is what forms the minimum cost associated with producing anything. "Energy" in physics is even defined as "the ability to do work," and that definition is 100% applicable in physically producing goods and services. The economy is a physical system.
How useful energy is in understanding the inner workings of a given economy isn't the point here.

> In fact, that energy appears as "free", there is no price for solar energy
Yes, energy has to be converted into a useful form (which requires useful energy itself). That what a venus fly trap does in producing the "service" of capturing a fly.
To go into more detail on this specific example: you can view the fly trap like a factory. There's an energy input via sunlight. That energy is partially used up in producing chemical reactions and storing some of it energy storage molecules. That energy is later released to drive nutrient uptake, biotransformation, growth and metabolism. It's used to help build and operate the fly catching apparatus. This is all directly analogous with how energy is sued to make products in an economy, with the extraction of raw materials, their transport and processing, the manufacturing into finished goods and the transport of the finished goods to the place of sale/utilization.

If the fly trap doesn't receive enough energy to produce and operate the trapping mechanism, then it doesn't trap flies.
Understanding the underlying energetics of biology is an active and useful field of study.

[Anonymous No.53713721]

>>53713491
>>53713692
All I'm really getting at with this thread is that energy determines (or is the primary factor in determining) what can and cannot exist within an economy, as well as how large an economy can actually be.

[Anonymous No.53713840]

>>53713646
>The land owning aristocrat could meet the urban craftsman and come to agreements mediated by money, but the equality of the money was (and is) actually key to perpetuating the inequality of each social role.
Which is to say, the manner of living and socio-political status of the landlord and the craftsman are not implicated in the monetary exchange. The monetary exchange is an atomic event, once I pay for shoes from the store me and the store have no more business with each other. Monetary exchange is useful for social interactions among the socio-politically unequal because there are no complicated conditions required for it. Buying things at Walmart isn't like coming to an agreement in Congress or navigating the legitimacy of claims to "citizenship" or things like that. Being a congressional representative or a citizen is a position of socio-political inequality in respect to others.

So what I'd say is, don't make the mistake of thinking people aren't animals and that the economy has a rigidly rational purpose. There is no dry rationality to the economy, the monetary economy is a specific complex phenomenon of human biology. We create monetary economies, and we create them to simply perpetuate the ordering and ranking of each other. Classical liberals fixated on the fundamental equality of monetary exchange, but monetary exchange existed in systems of fundamental social inequality for millenia, and the classical liberals were too fixated on the idea that there was a "progress" towards "rational" ordering of society that they often didnt recognize how monetary economies arose from those ancient conditions of social inequality and served some function for them.

[Anonymous No.53713875]

>>53710825
>And no, they haven't cracked cold fusion yet.
yes they have moron. the reason they haven't released it yet is the same reason you dont put a bowl of sugar for flies outside on a hot summer day

[Anonymous No.53714053]

>>53710724
are you the faggot that called my post about halo dying on /x/ an advertisement a couple weeks ago? fuck you

[Anonymous No.53714066]

>>53713721
>All I'm really getting at with this thread is that energy determines (or is the primary factor in determining) what can and cannot exist within an economy
I just don't know what this means. Energy doesn't determine these things, it is the opposite of that. Deterministic relations are functions that produce specific outputs. But the way a complex system produces information, which is the inverse of entropy, is not contained in the input from the higher entropy outside of the system. The sun is a producer of entropy that then hits the earth and seems to transform into a phantasmagoric array of things. Energy enters a computer from the wall, but there is little way to predict from that the architecture or information produced by the computer. In a sense we don't entirely know the computational capabilities if the computer given some amount of energy. We have a guess based on what we know right now, but that's exactly the issue. The specific answer to that question of what CAN be produced, in this instance computed, using an amount of energy depends on knowledge of practical things like materials science and laws of physics. So the universe suddenly appears as something made up of matter, energy and information. Energy is associated with entropy, it's heat and randomness. Information is the opposite, it's a pattern, redundancy. Complex systems take randomness and produce information, but it's not clear how much information can be produced by the energy. The only way to figure that out is to look for possible patterns, which we mostly do by looking for existing patterns and trying to figure out how they work to maybe reproduce them for our purposes. Energy is required for this, but you see how it is no more deterministic than a statement like "matter determines what can and cannot exist in the economy"? It actually doesn't! The opposite! Matter ontologically doesn't seem to determine anything in particular about the economy, many economies result.

[Anonymous No.53714087]

>>53714053
Wut?

[Anonymous No.53714094]

>>53710055
>Is the entire economy is simply an expression of energy extraction and usage?
yes

[Anonymous No.53714182]

>>53714066
>energy determines these things in other complex systems, such as biological life
>this doesn't apply to the economy
I honestly don't understand the source of the confusion here.

>computers
Yes, you can categorize the types of processes that are possible based on the energy drawn by the machine. You aren't running a modern game if the machine has a energy draw of a pocket calculator.

>deterministic
That word doesn't fit here. Energy simply gives you a range of possibilities, from which the specific architecture can select.

Energy is potential. The potential economy that CAN exist is dependent primarily on the available, useful energy that can flow through it.

The input energy is used to reduce entropy. The amount of available input energy determines the amount of possible entropy reduction and therefore the range of possible products and services. It doesn't determine the detail or specific information that arises, but it determines (at least some of) the bounders of possibility.

[Anonymous No.53714233]

>>53710055
that and space particles. you invested in space particles bro

[Anonymous No.53714242]

>>53714066
Also, just to make clear, I'm not trying to "own" you in an argument or something. I'm just saying if you're interested in the economy I think it's a bad direction to think too much about energy. The monetary economy is a phenomenon of humans, which are highly social primates. It orders and prices us and what we do. The Bank of England was started to fund a navy for the King, the Athenian monetary economy grew as it faced threats from Persia and started to invest into its navy of triremes. The way economies begin to find new ways of processing energy into navies and modern machines isn't explained by the presence of energy, the energy has always been there. The question is why the energy gets transformed into a car instead of a train, or a munitions factory instead of a fertilizer plant, or a trireme instead of fishing boats. Why do people have weddings rather than parades? Why do people get paid to play football? Why do cities bend over backwards to host sporting events? Status, rank, alliance, social signaling etc.

[Anonymous No.53714319]

>>53714242
No I'm enjoying your posts. I'm not even saying that looking at energy is a practical way of understanding economies, but it does give an overarching context to the whole thing.
And it does provide insights in cases where the energy context changes.

[Anonymous No.53714362]

>>53714182
>Energy is potential. The potential economy that CAN exist is dependent primarily on the available, useful energy that can flow through it.
My issue is this doesn't seem to explain anything so I don't know what the point of saying it is. It's nearly saying "what is possible is possible". We don't know what is possible at various points in our history. And the engine for pushing the boundaries of what is possible isn't seeking the extraction and usage of energy for its own sake, so I dunno what it means to say the economy is "an expression" of energy extraction and usage. It does extract and use energy, but is that what it is? If "no, it's an expression of energy extraction and usage", what determines the "expression"? It can't be energy, there are many different kinds of economies given similar energy. So we neither know why an economy seeks to extract and use more energy, nor what it uses it for by looking at the energy. We don't even know the limits of the usage of the energy we have, because we don't have a precedent for thinking we've discovered either all of the energy available to us or the ways it can be used. So we know nothing about the economy by saying that.

[Anonymous No.53714364]

[Anonymous No.53714479]

>>53714362
>My issue is this doesn't seem to explain anything
I think if it a bit like genes and the environment. Genes determine a range of possibilities out of which the environment selects. Energy is about potential, what can and cannot be.
We live in a complex industrial civilization largely because of the amount of useful energy we have available to us. It's not the only factor by any means, but it's a fundamental, absolutely necessary factor.
>It's nearly saying "what is possible is possible"
No, it describes the envelope of the possible, if only in vague manner.

> there are many different kinds of economies given similar energy
Yes, nothing I'm talking about is at odds with this.

Generally, if we have more available energy, we can produce more goods and services per capita. It's really not that much more than this.

[Anonymous No.53714759]

>>53710055
MouthofX?

[Anonymous No.53715033]

>>53710920
>>53711290
>>53711997
>>53712460
>well ackhtually solar panel are so easy to make i can roduce them myself!
>>why you're not producing them then
>it's because propagandists and capatalism
>>ok but where's the proof of what you cla-
>no well ackhtually you feel for the propaganda machine!
>>but you said renewable energy could be cheap!
>WELL I DON'T HAVE TO PROVE SHIT RETARD, RICH PEOPLE ARE THE REASON WHY I CAN'T HAVE FREE SHIT, THAT'S WHY I CAN'T MAKE SOLAR PANEL, DUH
>ALSO YOU THINK COVID WAS AN HOAX THAT'S TOTALLY RELEVANT AND ON-TOPIC TO NOT BELIEVE A WORD OUT OF YOUR MOUTH!

[Anonymous No.53715384]

>>53715033
You could google in two seconds and find out how tax and energy grid incentives are being used to strangle the solar panel industry in its crib. Here you are posting memes instead. They don't even pay you.

[Anonymous No.53716147]

>>53710055
SHADOW WIZARD MONEY GANG

[Anonymous No.53716897]

>>53713840
Well put. Can you recommend any books that go into this?

[Anonymous No.53717059]

>>53710055
Based and real

[Anonymous No.53717101]

>>53710055
Yes. We utilize energy to stay alive, after all, and we have learned how to "store" and "exchange" that energy with others.

[Anonymous No.53717870]

>>53710055
Yes.

[Anonymous No.53718256]

>>53715384
>>53715384
>12 pbtid
>doesn't say a single thing of substance or cite a single verifiable fact
>just calls everyone sheep and is contrarian for no discernible reason

[Anonymous No.53718279]

>>53710055
Yes.
Mammon uses the economy to harvest energy from his slaves.

[Anonymous No.53718345]

>>53710826
>Make an actual argument
Why do you want to argue all the time?Why don't you stop being angry at your tracher, and just agree with him for once?

[Anonymous No.53718397]

>>53710055
>everyone saying yes
bunch of NPCs kys

[Anonymous No.53718575]

>>53718397
Anon. Do you not see that there is a consolidation of power that is occurring?

[Anonymous No.53718658]

So invest in VDE?

[Anonymous No.53718796]

>>53710724
The WoW AH analogy holds up, at least in classic where nearly every lvl 60 recipe requires runecloth.

[Anonymous No.53718853]

>>53710129
supply doesnt exist with energy, demand cant exist without energy retard.

[Anonymous No.53721457]

>>53718575
even if OP were 100% right you should not suck his cock like this. it's unreasonable how everyone is gaslighting me regardless of the topic but people like OP get a free pass even with inane oversimplified shit opinions.

[Anonymous No.53722831]

>>53710055
Economy means household management; but the older meaning of 'oikos' is tribe. So the true meaning is tribal management. Imagine managing a nomadic tribe, and you understand the economy.

[Anonymous No.53723872]

>>53710055
Yes, but throw in manipulation and lies

[Anonymous No.53723892]

>>53710055
Correctomundo

[Anonymous No.53724369]

>>53718853
is a shoe that takes 10 years of labour ot make worth more than an identical shoe that took 1 day to make comrade?

[Anonymous No.53725185]

>>53710055
The language of the future Spice Guild of nuclear power will be French.

[Anonymous No.53725440]

>>53710055
checked, yes everything is energy
>>53710724
this anon gets it