The thing is there are a ton of MMOs that are coming out. Their claim makes no sense if you look at the slated releases.

What crashed and brought back was gaming consoles.

No one releases MMO’s? anymore? Dune’s MMO just dropped last week.

When COVID shutdown ket up and theaters opened I saw The Last Vermeer. It was me and one other guy. When the movie ended we sat somewhat far apart and talked about the film for 15 minutes. It was nice to not be the only one there and to talk with someone who saw the film

We were talking about whether large sweeping economic changes are a bad idea and whether incremental changes are better. You were arguing against that and I used minimum wage as an example.

Im tired of explaining things to you, so let’s stop here.

My town was one of the wealthier in the USA at the time and had a substantial population of immigrants from Korea/Japan/Taiwan so it made sense as a third language offering for the kids who were going back to Asia.

A ton of American kids took it because their parents were in finance and pushed it.

edit: It wasn’t commonly offered in NJ schools in that time. That might have changed in the decades since I graduated

Went back and read this. I stand by my position. You also should read what I wrote because you are replying to points Im not making at all.

You have already made it clear you have never studied economics in an academic setting which means you do not really know anything about the subject just like I do 't know astrophysics because I did not study it.

Why would I waste my time reading posts from someone who starts out antagonistic and shows no understanding of the subject or its history?

In NJ most of it os because it is NJ which has a higher cost of living across the state (last I checked). Until federal legalization happens everything that is sold here is grown here. That keeps prices high as bonded warehousing space is pricy here.

I don’t think you are following this thread at all.

Large sweeping economic changes are usually bad. Medicare for all wouldn’t be a sweeping change unless we immediately banned all private insurances which M4A would not do. M4A would be increasing the efficiency of the American economy which is what economists want.

Large sweeping economic changes would be things like adding $5 to the federal minimum wage all at once. The economy would likely grow from an incremental move that added $5 over the course of a few years but spiking it hard and fast will kill a lot of businesses that would have been fine with $1/yr over 5 years. It does not help to increase the minimum wage if it causes rapid widespread unemployment (note: I am absolutely not arguing against a minimum wage increase just against a rapid shift).

It’s a joke about their writing system

Yes my public high school had it as a language back in the late 1980s/early 90s. This would be New Jersey, USA.

You already made your lack of understanding and education clear, why are you doubling down on that?

Economics is the study of the distribution of scarce resources. It isn’t inherently focused on money and Marxist economics is a thing.

Maybe dont reply and instead address your educational shortfalls.

Without question but there were centuries before that happened where it was more organic.

they’re literally a poverty cult based on empirically proven wrong axioms

Here’s where the fun begins because the highlighted portion above makes it clear you have never at any point taken a course in economics.

“printing money creates inflation”,

It does which is why monetary policy is important to focus on.

“rising the minimum wage creates unemployment”

This isn’t that common as most of the studies done recently suggests this is not the case. There are some who still maintain that in specific situations this can occur but it isn’t as common as you state.

“public expenditure in healthcare, pensions and education is bad for the economy”.

Please provide either a valid academic source for this or an opinion piece printed in a credible newspaper from an actual economist (eg Robert Reich is not an economist while Krugman and Mankiew are)

You should do the opposite of what most economists preach.

This is the clearest sign you have no education in the field. I have a buddy who focuses on healthcare economics why would you ask him about trade policy? That’s like asking your dentist if you beed elbow surgery.

No, Im saying sweeping economic changes come with unforeseen consequences which is why many/most economists dont push for massive sweeping change.

This isn’t “bullshit excuses” as you are focusing on the potential political gains and I am talking about the economic problems that could come about from sweeping economic changes.

When the New Deal passed the USA was a larger portion of the world economy and it was growing.

America largely believes the right to free expression and speech outweighs the risks brought on by those rights.

The problem is now we have a lot of fascists and we are going to lose those rights

Really large sweeping economic changes tends to have significant unexpected problems created from them. It would be bad if we lifted everyone up and then destroyed our ability to maintain that new status in the process.

Voters want conviction. Republicans have it, and Democrats don’t.

Agreed

No I im in a place where it is legal. I paid $45-60 for high grade in the 1990s in NJ and that’s the same price it is now. The higher grade stuff just got consistently better.

RDR2 is so great the NYT film reviewer mentioned as one of the best stories that year.