Posted by Peter Franks on April 13, 2011, 5:35 pm
On 4/7/2011 12:04 PM, Giga2 <Giga2 wrote:
>> On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 09:29:02 +0100, Giga2"<"Giga2 wrote:
>>
>>>> On Wed, 06 Apr 2011 20:15:47 +0100, Giga2"<"Giga2 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/6/2011 1:36 AM, Falcon wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [..]
>>>>>>>>>> Oh yeah, opportunity cost. Always easy to forget. I think 5% is a
>>>>>>>>>> reasonable estimate for such figures. So the question is will it
>>>>>>>>>> still be worth quite a lot in 15 years?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Because the newest generation panels will be better and a 10th of
>>>>>>>> the price?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Joking aside, I'd put a few up if they WERE a tenth of the price and
>>>>>>> doing
>>>>>>> so didn't cost everyone else money in the form of higher electricity
>>>>>>> prices.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cost isn't the issue, cost /effectiveness/ IS.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As soon as they are cost effective, I'll install them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At current prices, they are NOT cost effective, so why would I
>>>>>> install them?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe to do something for the general good?
>>>>
>>>> Who decides what's the "general good"? Isn't that what the market is
>>>> all about?
>>>>
>>> I would say the individual themselves must decide what they are to do,
>>> for the general good or otherwise.
>>
>> Exactly. So why take my money so someone else can buy something I don't
>> think improves the common good? If they want to advance their idea of
>> the common good, they can do it with their money. Then they're entitled
>> to feel superior, if that's what's driving them.
>>
> This has been decided through the democratic process. If you don't agree
> with it fine but you may have to live with it.
We don't live in a democracy.
Duh.
You capture the sentiments of the English perfectly. Always deferring
to some higher mortal authority to tell them what to do. Nice, very nice.
Posted by Giga2 on April 14, 2011, 8:18 am
> On 4/7/2011 12:04 PM, Giga2 <Giga2 wrote:
>>> On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 09:29:02 +0100, Giga2"<"Giga2 wrote:
>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 06 Apr 2011 20:15:47 +0100, Giga2"<"Giga2 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 4/6/2011 1:36 AM, Falcon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [..]
>>>>>>>>>>> Oh yeah, opportunity cost. Always easy to forget. I think 5% is
>>>>>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>>>>>> reasonable estimate for such figures. So the question is will it
>>>>>>>>>>> still be worth quite a lot in 15 years?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Because the newest generation panels will be better and a 10th of
>>>>>>>>> the price?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Joking aside, I'd put a few up if they WERE a tenth of the price
>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>> doing
>>>>>>>> so didn't cost everyone else money in the form of higher
>>>>>>>> electricity
>>>>>>>> prices.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cost isn't the issue, cost /effectiveness/ IS.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As soon as they are cost effective, I'll install them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> At current prices, they are NOT cost effective, so why would I
>>>>>>> install them?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe to do something for the general good?
>>>>>
>>>>> Who decides what's the "general good"? Isn't that what the market is
>>>>> all about?
>>>>>
>>>> I would say the individual themselves must decide what they are to do,
>>>> for the general good or otherwise.
>>>
>>> Exactly. So why take my money so someone else can buy something I don't
>>> think improves the common good? If they want to advance their idea of
>>> the common good, they can do it with their money. Then they're entitled
>>> to feel superior, if that's what's driving them.
>>>
>>
>> This has been decided through the democratic process. If you don't agree
>> with it fine but you may have to live with it.
> We don't live in a democracy.
Speak for yourself!
> Duh.
> You capture the sentiments of the English perfectly. Always deferring to
> some higher mortal authority to tell them what to do. Nice, very nice.
Posted by Giga2 on April 14, 2011, 8:18 am
> Giga2" <"Giga2 wrote:
>>> On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 09:29:02 +0100, Giga2" <"Giga2 wrote:
>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 06 Apr 2011 20:15:47 +0100, Giga2" <"Giga2 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 4/6/2011 1:36 AM, Falcon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> [..]
>>>>>>>>>>> Oh yeah, opportunity cost. Always easy to forget. I think 5%
>>>>>>>>>>> is a reasonable estimate for such figures. So the question
>>>>>>>>>>> is will it still be worth quite a lot in 15 years?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Because the newest generation panels will be better and a 10th
>>>>>>>>> of the price?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Joking aside, I'd put a few up if they WERE a tenth of the
>>>>>>>> price and doing
>>>>>>>> so didn't cost everyone else money in the form of higher
>>>>>>>> electricity prices.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cost isn't the issue, cost /effectiveness/ IS.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As soon as they are cost effective, I'll install them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> At current prices, they are NOT cost effective, so why would I
>>>>>>> install them?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Maybe to do something for the general good?
>>>>>
>>>>> Who decides what's the "general good"? Isn't that what the market
>>>>> is all about?
>>>>>
>>>> I would say the individual themselves must decide what they are to
>>>> do, for the general good or otherwise.
>>>
>>> Exactly. So why take my money so someone else can buy something I
>>> don't think improves the common good? If they want to advance their
>>> idea of the common good, they can do it with their money. Then
>>> they're entitled to feel superior, if that's what's driving them.
>>>
>>
>> This has been decided through the democratic process. If you don't
>> agree with it fine but you may have to live with it.
> He doesn't have to live with it. He can simply move to one of the
> paradises in this world for his type, like Somalia. No government to make
> decisions he objects to.
I understand some prisons are also quite lawless places when the guards
arn't looking!
Posted by Bill Ward on April 13, 2011, 10:12 pm
On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 09:45:12 -0700, Bob F wrote:
> Bill Ward wrote:
>>> Maybe to do something for the general good?
>>
>> Who decides what's the "general good"? Isn't that what the market is
>> all about?
>
> That's the last thing the "market" is about. It is about profits.
Profit in a free market is the measure of wealth creation.
Suppose you have a garage sale and offer some old vinyl records you don't
really want. If someone comes in and you negotiate a price of say $0
for the lot, your buyer is happy because he now has records he thinks are
worth more than $0, and you are happy because you got rid of some
records you thought were worth less, and have $0 profit to boot.
Wealth has been created, because both buyer and seller are happier. Only
the private sector can create wealth, and profit is the measure of it.
> Sometimes a society makes decisions that there are more important things
> than profits to better the lives of its citizens.
And nearly always screws things up in the process. If profit is the
result of a free market exchange, how can it be bad? Both participants
are happier.
Those who prefer to get something for nothing appreciate government
intervention, of course.
Cue the whining: "But markets aren't really free!"
And I'll reply: "Then get the hell out of the way!"
See, wasn't that easy?
Posted by Bill Ward on April 14, 2011, 7:26 am
On Wed, 13 Apr 2011 22:02:37 -0700, Bob F wrote:
> Bill Ward wrote:
>>> Sometimes a society makes decisions that there are more important
>>> things than profits to better the lives of its citizens.
>>
>> And nearly always screws things up in the process. If profit is the
>> result of a free market exchange, how can it be bad? Both participants
>> are happier.
>
> So if I make a profit by murdering you for hire, that's fine with you?
Free trade does not mean lawless. That's what the justice system is
for. Free trade means consensual exchanges without force or fraud, and
the justice system protects the rest of us from loons like you. I won't
even mention the 2nd amendment.
> Ummm. Maybe what you said is not true.
>You've apparently been exposed to too much Lloyd illogic.
>> Those who prefer to get something for nothing appreciate government
>> intervention, of course.
>
> Which is why business hires all those lobbyists.
Finally you got one right! Accident, or attempted sarcasm?
XML site map
>>
>>>> On Wed, 06 Apr 2011 20:15:47 +0100, Giga2"<"Giga2 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> On 4/6/2011 1:36 AM, Falcon wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [..]
>>>>>>>>>> Oh yeah, opportunity cost. Always easy to forget. I think 5% is a
>>>>>>>>>> reasonable estimate for such figures. So the question is will it
>>>>>>>>>> still be worth quite a lot in 15 years?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Because the newest generation panels will be better and a 10th of
>>>>>>>> the price?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Joking aside, I'd put a few up if they WERE a tenth of the price and
>>>>>>> doing
>>>>>>> so didn't cost everyone else money in the form of higher electricity
>>>>>>> prices.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Cost isn't the issue, cost /effectiveness/ IS.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As soon as they are cost effective, I'll install them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> At current prices, they are NOT cost effective, so why would I
>>>>>> install them?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe to do something for the general good?
>>>>
>>>> Who decides what's the "general good"? Isn't that what the market is
>>>> all about?
>>>>
>>> I would say the individual themselves must decide what they are to do,
>>> for the general good or otherwise.
>>
>> Exactly. So why take my money so someone else can buy something I don't
>> think improves the common good? If they want to advance their idea of
>> the common good, they can do it with their money. Then they're entitled
>> to feel superior, if that's what's driving them.
>>
> This has been decided through the democratic process. If you don't agree
> with it fine but you may have to live with it.