/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.5941262]

So Superman breaks a lot of things. Is that good or bad for the economy? See a lot of businesses would close, right, but the window makers would just be constantly in business as would people providing sand and shit for the glass.

[Anonymous No.5941266]

It is good for the economy because it would be worse to let the super villians destroy everything.

[Anonymous No.5941268]

>>5941266
Okay, let's assume that Superman is just some asshole going around breaking shit and they gave up trying to stop him so they're just trying to work around him.

[Anonymous No.5941267]

>>5941266
>it's good because the alternative is worse
It doesn't work that way. Right?

[Anonymous No.5941271]

>>5941268
>Assume a perfectly spherical Superman

[joker !KNs1o0VDv6 No.5941272]

>>5941266
In real life the bad guy would simply grab superman,and move on from earth/humanity.

Then the Americans would forget that they were visited by ET and go back to caring about their petty celebrities.

[Anonymous No.5941294]

>>5941267
you don't get outside much, do you?

[Anonymous No.5941308]

>>5941268
In this case you would have to consider that the companies had insurance and the insurance company would be the one really losing money here.

[Anonymous No.5941310]

>>5941271
loled.

[Anonymous No.5941316]

Bad for the economy.

Google broken window fallacy (I assume this is what you're referring to, actually, and wanting to see if people get the reference?)

1. If the money was not spent on windows, it would be spent on something else.

2. The money is consumed rather than invested, so the economy doesn't grow. Despite the lies polititians tell you to justify everything they do, the only way that spending improves the economy is if it leads to investment. Consuming wealth does not "free it up." Just the opposite. It eats the seed corn

[Anonymous No.5941339]

>>5941316
>implying we don't individually determine value

[Anonymous No.5941374]

>>5941339
He implied nothing of the sort. It's very simple, really. If something is destroyed, society is worse off by the value of whatever it is that was destroyed.

If the destroyed thing is replaced, society must devote resources to its re-creation or repair. Society is then worse off by whatever those resources could have been used to make. Even in the best case, where the replacement is effected only through the labor of someone who would otherwise be idle, society is worse off, since the final quantity of all goods is the same, but now the worker has traded leisure time for time spent laboring.

[Anonymous No.5941378]

>>5941374
nothing you said was very simple, really, or even accurate. If I remove a $10k building from existence (ideal world here), how much will it cost to replace? $10k.

You are trying to say that we lost $10k, plus $10k to rebuild it, so $20k total, which is exactly the most retarded thing I've heard on this board since I started browsing it 1 hour ago.

[Anonymous No.5941387]

>>5941378
the 10k you spent building a replacement 10k building could have building something else
...like a program to help stop human trafficking

society broke even when it could have been better off

[Anonymous No.5941399]

http://www.cracked.com/article_15416_6-horrible-aftermaths-implied-by-movies-with-happy-endings.html
>Man of Steel -- Metropolis Will Probably Never Be Able to Rebuild

Bad for the economy

[Anonymous No.5941400]

>>5941387
good point, there's no reason to fix broken things.

Everybody, stop all repairs. No more fixing roads, repairing schools. All contruction jobs stop now!

we are diverting all money toward figuring out a way to not fix pot holes. hopefully this works out. Sorry for the pot holes in the mean time.

[Anonymous No.5941401]

>>5941271
Is he also frictionless?

[Anonymous No.5941404]

>>5941400
when a meta human is gonna randomly fart and wipe out a village somewhere, never-mind chasing down a super villain that wanted the town intact anyways, there seems little point doesn't it?

[Anonymous No.5941413]

Yes.
God forbid we demand a quality product.

let's just keep putting a cheap ass patch on a quick road built by the lowest bidding contractor..

yes, i see your point, now.
We mustn't get in the way of Capitalism.

That would be Un-american.

[Anonymous No.5941417]

>>5941413
>implying cheapest price is best value, and best choice

Capitalism is both fucking awesome, and fucking unrelated.

[Anonymous No.5941420]

>>5941262
I think it'd be bad for the economy. Government spending would go through the roof to clean up the city after being demolished by Superman. Not to mention that businesses would have to make some serious cuts in order to rebuild their broken buildings. Could also set them back on the purchase of better/newer technology too which could've increased profits for them.

[Anonymous No.5941423]

Well whether or not it does, it definitely shouldn't.
Our economy seems to be very flawed in that it requires a continual wasting of resources regardless of whether the pproduct is needed or not.

Imagine a phone company invented the perfect phone more or less, well they would eventually go out of business, or at least have to do a lot of firings after the initial purchasing craze wears off qnd other companies start copy tje design.
They are punished for actually doing good.

Our economy unfortunately is set up to do 1 thing very well: keep a constant circulation of money flowing. Doesn't matter if the corresponding resources are going down the drain or not. Doesn't matter if things are being done less efficiently or not.

Our economy seems outdated to me

[Anonymous No.5941425]

>>5941413
that's funny. When I go to oklahoma, all the roads are shit because they went with cheap concrete, while in oregon the roads are smooth asphalt.

Oklahoma must be full of capitalists, and oregon full of communists.

[Anonymous No.5941426]

>>5941423
unfortunately for the point you were making, phone companies are offering a service, not a product. Even if not a single phone sold, comcast, verizon, sprint would still rake in millions.

Also, the idea that things being done efficiently doesn't matter is silly. Why don't you stop being a dumb ass and go with ting.com? You'll pay 1/4 the price.

People like to blame the problems of advertisement and mass marketing on capitalism, but those are 2 totally separate issues.

[Anonymous No.5941431]

I can't believe no one has brought up the broken window fallacy:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parable_of_the_broken_window

[Anonymous No.5941432]

You act like this isn't just a set up for lex luthor to be president

[Anonymous No.5941435]

Hmmmm okay OP keep bumping the thread to hide my post >>5941399 because the article inspired this thread.

faggot

[Anonymous No.5941443]

>>5941404
This is why I don't shower. I just get dirty again tomorrow. There's no point.

[Anonymous No.5941448]

>>5941431

>>5941316

[Anonymous No.5941450]

>>5941448
>>5941443
yep keep bumping ignore this
>>5941435
>>5941399
I know you made this thread after reading that on cracked right faggot?

[Anonymous No.5941455]

>>5941378
That's not what I said; you're double counting. If we destroy the building and nothing else changes, we're one building worse off. Even if we rebuild, we still haven't broken even: we have the same number of buildings as before we destroyed one, but we're worse off by the labor and materiel needed to construct a building.

>>5941400
This is just stupid. The point is not that fixing things is not worthwhile, it's that it's costly. If you break things, you have to fix things just to get back to where you started. Breaking things and then fixing them causes no net gain, but has net costs. Thus, breaking things is generally bad.

[Anonymous No.5941496]

>>5941443
you are wise to allow your dead skin cells and natural body oils to do what they are actually evolved to do.
good hygiene starts by not getting filthy to begin with after all.

there is ample scientific evidence that daily showering causes an escalation of eczema, rosacea, and other kinds of skin irritations, and an increase in risk of exposure to harmful chemicals and unfriendly bacteria as the natural body defenses are stripped away.

sadly, it seems some folks are not able to make it through a single day without ending up looking like they just crawled out of a sewer
their confusion is understandable

[Anonymous No.5941511]

>wash towels
>all clean
>take shower
>all clean
>use towel to dry off
>towel is dirty, better go wash it

[Anonymous No.5941524]

>>5941262

>>breaking things + workers = jobs
>>breaking things + killing a city full of workers = sad times

This was a terrible superman movie.

ffyi: nolans batman reboot was bad too.

[Anonymous No.5941593]

>>5941496

I grew up never washing my face. At most it would get a rinse with water.

Zero acne and no more than 10 spots throughout high school.

I also didn't shower very often. I often smelled bad. I wish I showered more often.

[Anonymous No.5941638]

>>5941400
>we are diverting all money toward figuring out a way to not fix pot holes.

If we no longer had to fix pot holes, we would indeed be better off.

[Anonymous No.5941642]

>>5941413
>>5941425

What does capitalism have to do with it?

[Anonymous No.5941651]

>>5941431
/thread