Peak Oil
Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Poverty Thread (merged)

What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.
Post a reply

Unread postby Dezakin » Tue 21 Jun 2005, 01:50:55

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') still don't understand what "efficiency of resource allocation" means, particularly the word "efficiency". Can you give a clear definition so we can all understand what you're talking about?


When you have competitive markets assigning prices you can rather transparently model supply and demand. If supplies are short, prices go up and that sends signals to production firms (or investment venture capital firms exploring resource substitution) to raise supply and claim profit. This works in commodity markets very well, including our beloved oil.

When you have planning beaurocracies that attempt to assign value to commodities without market mechanisms, they almost allways miss the price, and so many resources end up wasted. Consider for instance the performance of state run enterprises versus the market leaders of competitive markets: for instance steel industries in China. The market based firms are allways more profitable.

The reason for this is usually because partly because planning bureaucracies aren't uncorruptable (nepotism, kickbacks and graft can often bleed off efficiencies granted by economies of scale) and mostly because the planning bureaucracy is insufficient for processing all the information to make fair responses for supply, demand conditions relative to markets.

http://ingrimayne.saintjoe.edu/econ/Eff ... shell.html
User avatar
Dezakin
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1569
Joined: Wed 09 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Unread postby Doly » Tue 21 Jun 2005, 04:43:09

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dezakin', '
')When you have competitive markets assigning prices you can rather transparently model supply and demand. If supplies are short, prices go up and that sends signals to production firms (or investment venture capital firms exploring resource substitution) to raise supply and claim profit. This works in commodity markets very well, including our beloved oil.


It doesn't work very well in case of a shortage of an essential commodity. That is why governments resort to rationing in such a case.
User avatar
Doly
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 4370
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Top

Unread postby JohnDenver » Tue 21 Jun 2005, 05:27:03

Thanks, Dezakin. That link was very helpful.

Lets develop their example with reference to petroleum:

"Suppose that we have a unit of diesel fuel which has two potential uses. In use A, it powers the yacht of a wealthy individual who is willing to pay $25; in use B, it fuels the generator of a hospital which is trying to save human lives, but has no money to pay for the fuel. The concept of economic efficiency says that the diesel fuel should be used to fuel the wealthy individual's yacht because it has the highest value. If the diesel fuel is in fact used in A, the result is economically efficient. If it ends up being used for B, the economic system is not producing as much value as it could, and the result is economically inefficient."

This notion of "efficiency" is ridiculous horseshit. Pseudo-science. It has nothing whatsoever to do with efficiency. In fact, it's simply a justification of waste by the rich, dressed up to look like a mathematical principle.
JohnDenver
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2145
Joined: Sun 29 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Unread postby I_Like_Plants » Tue 21 Jun 2005, 05:45:47

I'd say the road to hell is paved with effeciency....

but in reality it's enough to say the road to hell is paved!
I_Like_Plants
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 3839
Joined: Sun 12 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
Location: 1st territorial capitol of AZ
Top

Unread postby Dezakin » Tue 21 Jun 2005, 11:04:21

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '"')Suppose that we have a unit of diesel fuel which has two potential uses. In use A, it powers the yacht of a wealthy individual who is willing to pay $25; in use B, it fuels the generator of a hospital which is trying to save human lives, but has no money to pay for the fuel. The concept of economic efficiency says that the diesel fuel should be used to fuel the wealthy individual's yacht because it has the highest value. If the diesel fuel is in fact used in A, the result is economically efficient. If it ends up being used for B, the economic system is not producing as much value as it could, and the result is economically inefficient."

Indeed it would. Any hospital so out of sorts that they can't afford to keep the lights on isn't one I'd want in business.

These examples about rich assholes farting around on yachts competing against bankrupt hospitals arent very helpful. Why would a hospital be in such dire straits? In the real world if its satisfying demand it can well afford to compete with wealthy playboys on its premiums.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')his notion of "efficiency" is ridiculous horseshit. Pseudo-science. It has nothing whatsoever to do with efficiency. In fact, it's simply a justification of waste by the rich, dressed up to look like a mathematical principle.


Okay. Who decides who gets resources? A planning bureau? You?

Markets may seem callous and incourteous, but at least they are uncorruptable and transparent.
User avatar
Dezakin
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1569
Joined: Wed 09 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Top

Unread postby EdF » Tue 21 Jun 2005, 17:23:38

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dezakin', '.')..Markets may seem callous and incourteous, but at least they are uncorruptable and transparent.


That's a tragically hilarious statement.

- Ed
EdF
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 177
Joined: Sun 08 May 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Unread postby ohanian » Tue 21 Jun 2005, 23:22:52

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JohnDenver', 'T')hanks, Dezakin. That link was very helpful.

Lets develop their example with reference to petroleum:

"Suppose that we have a unit of diesel fuel which has two potential uses. In use A, it powers the yacht of a wealthy individual who is willing to pay $25; in use B, it fuels the generator of a hospital which is trying to save human lives, but has no money to pay for the fuel. The concept of economic efficiency says that the diesel fuel should be used to fuel the wealthy individual's yacht because it has the highest value. If the diesel fuel is in fact used in A, the result is economically efficient. If it ends up being used for B, the economic system is not producing as much value as it could, and the result is economically inefficient."

This notion of "efficiency" is ridiculous horseshit. Pseudo-science. It has nothing whatsoever to do with efficiency. In fact, it's simply a justification of waste by the rich, dressed up to look like a mathematical principle.


Actually I think it worked pretty well. Market Capital economics exposes the hypocritical society for what it is.

The reason the hospital has no money is because

A) If it is a private hospital then it is inefficient and thus needs to be shutdown permanently.

B) If it is a government hospital then it is because the political party in charge of the government deem that the hospital is of lesser (or lower) value to the electorate. If the electorate disagreed with the views of the political party in charge of the government, they are free to vote for a different political party.

So in what way is the Capitalist Market System inefficient?

If the society cannot tolerate Rich people spending money on diesel fuel then society can vote for a political party that places 60% income tax on the rich. Society is ultimately free to do whatever they deem acceptable and moral.


So in what way is the Capitalist Market System inefficient?

If you do not like the way the world is then CHANGE THE ATTITUDE OF SOCIETY. Do not blame capitalist market economics.

The big problem is globalization. Globalization mean it rather difficult for a small country to enforce the laws of their society on the local market place if it runs counter to the global economics reality.
User avatar
ohanian
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1553
Joined: Sun 17 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Unread postby JohnDenver » Wed 22 Jun 2005, 04:16:13

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ohanian', 'T')he reason the hospital has no money is because...


Actually the reason the hospital has no money is because it is located in sub-Saharan Africa, and its customers are all dirt poor.

My example of the hospital is just the tip of the iceberg. Use B could refer to anybody doing useful work. Maybe use B is a trucker who needs diesel to make a living, but unfortunately he can only pay $10, while the rich guy is willing to pay $25. So when diesel prices shoot up, the trucker gets put out of business and goes on welfare, while the rich guy is still buying fuel and farting around in his yacht. Economists call that an "economically efficient" outcome, as we have seen.

So what's your take on that, ohanian? That the trucker (like the hospital) is inefficient and needs to be shutdown permanently? That there's something wrong with how he's conducting business, and once he corrects that, capitalism will set everything right by making him richer than the rich guy so he can get back to work? How about when the price of fuel goes through the roof, and only the richest of the rich can afford it? Does that mean that all the millions of people who previously used fuel to earn an honest living were "inefficient and needed to be shutdown permanently"? And meanwhile, the rich guy is still out wasting fuel on his yacht, and we're all supposed to stand up and salute his "economic efficiency", and applaud this situation as a case of "optimal resource allocation" certified by the science of markets?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')o in what way is the Capitalist Market System inefficient?


It is inefficient because it provides no resources to those who most desperately need them, and provides too many resources to those who do not need them at all. Would you call that the hallmark of an efficient system of allocating resources?

Dezakin has a good point. Allocation of resources by planners and bureaucrats hasn't proven to be that great of an idea either. I don't know what the solution is, but one thing is for sure: the idea that "all resources to the wealthy = efficiency" is one of the most corrupt, self-serving, mentally retarded doctrines I have ever encountered. Call it whatever you want, but I'm not going to sit here and nod like a moron when somebody tells me that waste=efficiency.
JohnDenver
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2145
Joined: Sun 29 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Unread postby ohanian » Wed 22 Jun 2005, 12:20:58

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JohnDenver', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ohanian', 'T')he reason the hospital has no money is because...


Actually the reason the hospital has no money is because it is located in sub-Saharan Africa, and its customers are all dirt poor.


So the customers are all dirt poor. What that means is that, they do not have anything the rest of the world wants. Yet hypocritically these poor customer demands things the rest of the world has without being able to give anything of value in return. Why would anyone give anything to these people? Do you give money to beggars when they do not give anything of value back to you? How long can you afford to do this? One beggar? Ten beggars? One hundred beggars? In the long run, you will be drag down to their level because you gave away all your money.




$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JohnDenver', '
')My example of the hospital is just the tip of the iceberg. Use B could refer to anybody doing useful work. Maybe use B is a trucker who needs diesel to make a living, but unfortunately he can only pay $10, while the rich guy is willing to pay $25. So when diesel prices shoot up, the trucker gets put out of business and goes on welfare, while the rich guy is still buying fuel and farting around in his yacht. Economists call that an "economically efficient" outcome, as we have seen.


And your point is what? The only reason the trucker can only pay $10 is because he is paid very little. So why is he paid very little? Because the hypocrite SOCIETY say that he give very little to society. In other words, everyone else would not give him more money for the service he is providing to society. People say "he should be paid more" and the same people balk at paying high prices for groceries!!! Hello? If society paids the trucker more than the price of groceries will go up (transport cost increase due to higher trucker payments). How many people want to paid more for groceries. So all the crocodile tears come up. Poor trucker , he should be paid more (as long as price of groceries does not go up). What a hypocrite society. So do not blame the capitalist market system for what is a hypocritical societal problem.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JohnDenver', '
')So what's your take on that, ohanian? That the trucker (like the hospital) is inefficient and needs to be shutdown permanently? That there's something wrong with how he's conducting business, and once he corrects that, capitalism will set everything right by making him richer than the rich guy so he can get back to work? How about when the price of fuel goes through the roof, and only the richest of the rich can afford it? Does that mean that all the millions of people who previously used fuel to earn an honest living were "inefficient and needed to be shutdown permanently"? And meanwhile, the rich guy is still out wasting fuel on his yacht, and we're all supposed to stand up and salute his "economic efficiency", and applaud this situation as a case of "optimal resource allocation" certified by the science of markets?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'S')o in what way is the Capitalist Market System inefficient?



Yes, the trucker should be shutdown permanently. Now image all trucker shutdown permanently. What would happen. That's right the society would collapse!!! So the only way the hypocritical society will pay more for the trucker is for the same society to fear chaos. The fear of chaos is what gets the trucker more pay. Not the crocodile tears of a hypocrite society. Not the words of people who think they know it all and blame Capitalist Market System inefficiency. The Capitalist Market System is very efficient at bring out the societal hypocrisy. Words are just crocodile tears. The real power lies in SOCIAL ATTITUDES. As long as society thinks truckers are worth less (worthless???) then truckers are paid less. Do not be fooled by words, demand that SOCIETY put their money where their mouth is. HYPOCRITICAL TALK IS CHEAP. That's why hypocritical people just talk talk talk instead of pay more, pay more, pay more.


$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JohnDenver', '
')It is inefficient because it provides no resources to those who most desperately need them, and provides too many resources to those who do not need them at all. Would you call that the hallmark of an efficient system of allocating resources?

Yes, I call it the most efficient system of allocating resources in a hypocritical society. What society wants, society gets. If society does not want it, then society will put money where their mouth is. I can tell you what society wants. CHEAP GROCERIES. That's why the poor trucker get paid so little.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JohnDenver', '
')Dezakin has a good point. Allocation of resources by planners and bureaucrats hasn't proven to be that great of an idea either. I don't know what the solution is, but one thing is for sure: the idea that "all resources to the wealthy = efficiency" is one of the most corrupt, self-serving, mentally retarded doctrines I have ever encountered. Call it whatever you want, but I'm not going to sit here and nod like a moron when somebody tells me that waste=efficiency.

You may not know what the solution is but I do. If you want to change the world, you must first change the SOCIETAL ATTITUDES. Do not blame the Capitalist Market System. Do you blame the mirror if an asshole appears in your mirror everytime you look into it? Fix the source of the problem and the problem will go away. As long as you keep blaming the mirror and insist on buying new mirrors in hope that one day the person in the new mirror will look like Jesus Christ, then nothing will change.
User avatar
ohanian
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1553
Joined: Sun 17 Oct 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Unread postby marko » Wed 22 Jun 2005, 22:29:11

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dezakin', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'J')ust look at where capitalism has gotten us: A world where the population is roughly six times the planet's carrying capacity, where roughly half of the planet's population cannot satisfy their basic needs for food, shelter, and healthy living conditions, where a tiny fraction of the world's population live in incredible luxury made possible by the labor of billions of poor and struggling people.

Yes. Certainly a miserable situation. Better than any ever in history, but I suppose its still miserable.


Better than any ever in history for you and maybe for me and the top half of the world's population by income AT THE MOMENT.

However, much of the world's population (think Africa, much of India) lives in deeper poverty, due to overpopulation and capitalist exploitation, than it did, say, 2,000 years ago.

And more to the point, this system, with its cancerous and clearly unsustainable growth, has gotten us to a point where it is nearly certain that 80% of humanity will die off, if not 100% in a nuclear holocaust.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dezakin', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'H')ow can anyone think that capitalism is a good system, much less a rational one, when the facts about peak oil are now easily accessible?

Thats amusing. The answer is in the question. Capitalism has made you wealthy enough to commiserate in like minded internet communities on the desolate state the world is in because of the capitalist system.


Yes, and capitalism has made all of us wealthy enough to know that capitalism has doomed most if not all of us, most if not all of our species, and much of the biosphere. Hooray for capitalism! It allows those of us who are attentive to know that it will kill us.

I would be amused by your cluelessness if it weren't at the service of such a deadly system.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Dezakin', 'C')ertainly corporations are disturbing entities, but I cant think of a better way to do capital accumulation and management.

No doubt corporations are excellent capital accumulation devices.

However, capital accumulation has squandered our resources and impoverished much of humanity to enable a brief orgy of excessive consumption by a wealthy few over a few generations. The consequence of this squandering will be that most members of the species will die miserable deaths, and future generations, if they exist, will have a depleted resource base and will inhabit a degraded and contaminated environment. The consequences of the 2.5-century debauch that is capitalism will be thousands of years of damage.

Isn't capitalism fabulous.
User avatar
marko
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 443
Joined: Mon 31 Jan 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Massachusetts
Top

Unread postby marko » Wed 22 Jun 2005, 22:30:32

I apologize for this empty post. It had to do with my screen freezing....
User avatar
marko
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 443
Joined: Mon 31 Jan 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Massachusetts
Top

Unread postby marko » Wed 22 Jun 2005, 22:47:41

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ohanian', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JohnDenver', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ohanian', 'T')he reason the hospital has no money is because...


Actually the reason the hospital has no money is because it is located in sub-Saharan Africa, and its customers are all dirt poor.


So the customers are all dirt poor. What that means is that, they do not have anything the rest of the world wants. Yet hypocritically these poor customer demands things the rest of the world has without being able to give anything of value in return.


Actually, most sub-Saharan African countries have excellent soils, good cash crops, and rich mineral resources. The world wants these things. What Africa has lacked since the days of European colonialism is capital, because the Europeans stood in the way of indigenous capital formation so that their own firms could monopolize capital accumulation in their colonies. So, the African nations won their independence, but, lacking capital, had no way to develop their resources. Western capital filled the vacuum, and in most countries, Western firms are now extracting Africa's wealth and returning very little to the Africans, so that they are dirt poor and can't afford decent health care.

This thanks to the organized theft that is capitalism.

And to add insult to injury, a smug westerner thinks he is entitled to look down on the Africans who are victims of a system that has benefited him. The arrogance is breathtaking, since this westerner probably lives in the United States, a gluttonous country that, unlike most African countries, consumes far more than it produces.
User avatar
marko
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 443
Joined: Mon 31 Jan 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Massachusetts
Top

Unread postby agni » Thu 23 Jun 2005, 05:10:28

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('JohnDenver', '
')Dezakin has a good point. Allocation of resources by planners and bureaucrats hasn't proven to be that great of an idea either. I don't know what the solution is, but one thing is for sure: the idea that "all resources to the wealthy = efficiency" is one of the most corrupt, self-serving, mentally retarded doctrines I have ever encountered. Call it whatever you want, but I'm not going to sit here and nod like a moron when somebody tells me that waste=efficiency.


Hey, that's an awesome strawmen army!

-A
User avatar
agni
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Tue 14 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Unread postby agni » Thu 23 Jun 2005, 05:12:40

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('marko', '
')And to add insult to injury, a smug westerner thinks he is entitled to look down on the Africans who are victims of a system that has benefited him. The arrogance is breathtaking, since this westerner probably lives in the United States, a gluttonous country that, unlike most African countries, consumes far more than it produces.


In what way do most African countries produce far more than they consume?

-A
User avatar
agni
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 87
Joined: Tue 14 Jun 2005, 03:00:00
Top

Unread postby Raxozanne » Thu 23 Jun 2005, 07:25:26

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('agni', '
')In what way do most African countries produce far more than they consume?
-A


They produce alot of the cacao nuts to make your chocolate bars. Then Cadbury buys them dirt cheap. Africa doesn't export cacao powder because it gets taxed until its uncompetitive by our countries. A bet most Africans can't afford a chocolate bar. It's those damn trade agreements.
Hello, my name is Rax. I live in the Amazon jungle with a bunch of women. We are super eco feminists and our favourite passtimes are dangling men by their ankles and discussing peak oil. - apparently
Raxozanne
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 945
Joined: Thu 24 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Location: UK
Top

Unread postby Dezakin » Thu 23 Jun 2005, 14:50:37

marko:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'H')owever, much of the world's population (think Africa, much of India) lives in deeper poverty, due to overpopulation and capitalist exploitation, than it did, say, 2,000 years ago.


Sure. The bottom half had it much better as full slaves in agrarian land empires than they do now as subsistance farmers, merchants, traders. Right.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')nd more to the point, this system, with its cancerous and clearly unsustainable growth, has gotten us to a point where it is nearly certain that 80% of humanity will die off, if not 100% in a nuclear holocaust.


Right. The popular refrain since the beginning of history is that we're at the end of it. What makes you so special?

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'H')owever, capital accumulation has squandered our resources and impoverished much of humanity to enable a brief orgy of excessive consumption by a wealthy few over a few generations.


Well, actually capitial accumulation allows investment in projects that require economies of scale; But then I assume you think all such endevours are destructive since it appears that you believe hunter-gatherer societies are the apex of human society.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')ctually, most sub-Saharan African countries have excellent soils, good cash crops, and rich mineral resources. The world wants these things. What Africa has lacked since the days of European colonialism is capital, because the Europeans stood in the way of indigenous capital formation so that their own firms could monopolize capital accumulation in their colonies. So, the African nations won their independence, but, lacking capital, had no way to develop their resources. Western capital filled the vacuum, and in most countries, Western firms are now extracting Africa's wealth and returning very little to the Africans, so that they are dirt poor and can't afford decent health care.


Sounds awfully simplistic to me. I think it might have a little more to do with the internal governance rules than theft by multinationals. Hernando de Soto's take on this is that capital accumulation is actively prevented by poor governing laws in said countries.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')hey produce alot of the cacao nuts to make your chocolate bars. Then Cadbury buys them dirt cheap. Africa doesn't export cacao powder because it gets taxed until its uncompetitive by our countries. A bet most Africans can't afford a chocolate bar. It's those damn trade agreements.

Ah. So they would be better off it they didnt trade at all? Why does sub-saharan africa do so poorly compared to say China.
User avatar
Dezakin
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1569
Joined: Wed 09 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Top

proof that G8 talk of ending poverty a sham

Unread postby Jake_old » Tue 19 Jul 2005, 07:48:05

oh and also that Belgians are just as mean as everyone else :-D

here
Jake_old
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 689
Joined: Fri 25 Feb 2005, 04:00:00
Location: Luton, England
Top

Unread postby Specop_007 » Tue 19 Jul 2005, 09:04:46

Good!
If someone loans you money you pay them back. I really dont understand whats so hard about this very simple concept to understand.
Do you buy a house, then quit making payments? Do you get to drive a car off the lot without paying for it? Why are poor peoples and countries assumed to be exempt from this well established and understood business practices??
User avatar
Specop_007
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5586
Joined: Thu 12 Aug 2004, 03:00:00
Top

Unread postby Barbara » Tue 19 Jul 2005, 09:13:51

Because they were forced to take a debt much greater than needed. Or the money was offered to some corrupted leaders, put in office by foreign countries, just to keep the country under the feet and to steal their resurces "to pay the debt".

Also, oil can be bought in dollars only. And if happens that you're a poor country and you need energy and you have no dollars... guess what? Let's allow people pay oil in whatever currency they like! But it's impossible... guess why?

Wake up, specop. You watch Fox News too much. I'm still wondering how it happened you grasped this whole PO thing... but miracles can happen only once! :lol:
**no english mothertongue**
--------
Objects in the rear view mirror
are closer than they appear.
Barbara
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1121
Joined: Wed 26 May 2004, 03:00:00
Location: Zoorope
Top

Unread postby Doly » Tue 19 Jul 2005, 09:14:35

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Specop_007', 'W')hy are poor peoples and countries assumed to be exempt from this well established and understood business practices??


The problem isn't paying back, the problem is the interest.
User avatar
Doly
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 4370
Joined: Fri 03 Dec 2004, 04:00:00
Top
PreviousNext
Post a reply

Return to Open Topic Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest



cron