TheSveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel(Swedish:Sveriges riksbanks pris i ekonomisk vetenskap till Alfred Nobels minne), commonly referred to as theNobel Prize in Economics,[1][2]is an award for outstanding contributions to the field ofeconomics, generally regarded as the most prestigious award for that field.[3]Although not one of theNobel Prizesestablished by the will ofAlfred Nobelin 1895, it is identified with them, and prizes are announced with and awarded at the same ceremony.
Atleast quote the whole thing. It was not one of the initial nobel prizes, but is awarded by the same body, at the same time, and commonly known as a Nobel prize
Your speaking of individual value, I am not. As far as price determination, I trust you understand how supply vs demand works. The difference between value and price on each side is the economic incentive to engage in a transaction, aka profits. Without difference between value and price there is no incentive to exchange the good or service for money. I have stated several times that price doesn't inclued externalities, and that is one of the reasons that value, to the market, the true value of a good or service diverges from price.
If you don't grasp that free markets don't encapsulate externalities in prices, and that this often causes trye value to diverge from pruce than whomever paid for your education should demand a refund.
Reread the sentance you quoted. That is where your overlap lies. But as I described, the value to the two parties isn't the whole of the value. Since your stuck on econ 101, can I instead direct you to utility theory. As sophmoric understanding of economics is all that's required to easily see that you infact are intentionally biasing your definition of value.
False. Price has no consideration to externalities. Further, with respect to the two parties engaged in a transaction price is below what te buyer values a good at and above what a seller values it at. The market fan not organiclly set price to value.
Your asking the wrong questions... The real question is why you don't take your RC planes on a fishing trip a few miles off shore, out side of the AOR of the CAA. Just completely remove them. Thousands upon thousands of dollars cheaper.
... and sometimes the right thing to do is kill a few hundred people to prevent something like that from happening again.
Evil is a pretty loose concept.
I'm by no means an Obama fan. I don't really care for Neo-Cons at all, but the use of force was called for in this instance. Now we have a "peaceful" solution, that will result in a delay of a few weeks, or months, and we will end up needing to blow up Syria for a whole new list of reasons. We want both sides to take heavy losses, and to keep doing that for aslong as possible, while staying inside the boarders of Syria. The asymetry of the conflict is getting in the way of our, unstated, goal so the US will find a way to act. I would prefer that instead of killing people to insure they continue killing eachother, that we kill people to prevent the use of CBRN weapons.
The content of TFA and the views expresed by Dr. Tyson are completely moot. This is just a jumping off point for Libertarians to get fired up about a free market. If they get to call some one dumb it's all the better.
But, I, also, believe that that is a decision that should be left up to the doctors, nurses, and hospitals. I believe that private citizens should band together to voluntarily create funds to provide healthcare for those who cannot otherwise afford it.
That reminds me of a bit in the bible where Jesus said,"Fuck them, if they want healed the market will facilitate it."
Private citizens banding togather is often refered to as Government, btw.
Depends on what you mean by relatively safe. Compared to kickboxing a pack of hungry lions, yeah it's relatively safe.
Compared to surfing a desk in the bussiness park, taking indirect fire 3 or 4 times a week for 6 months, at a tilt isn't what I would really call relatively safe.
The farthest you can get from action in the military is teaching, recruiting or personel in any of the services. There are plenty of non-deployment or low deployment careers, they play a larger role then the service.
Don't worry, TheDarkMaster. This will facitiltate all kinds of scamming and abuse. It's just a question of who is going to manipulate the market and wipe the wealth of these folks out. Anyone foolish enough to store their wealth in Bitcoins is going to have a bad day. Banks atleast provide a reliable level of tax.
I think alot of people miss the point hiding in there. The Netflix - DRM model is the direct result of winning the war on DRM. Most consumers are unwilling to actully buy DRM encumbered content for the price that is being charged. Instead there are a few, legal and moral, options left. Movie and Recording Industries have basically deceded that non-DRMed content won't be available at any price. So instead of renting something, and being told we are buying it. We just end up with only rentable content. You can pick from several reasonable rental services, all way cheaper then what you would have paid for nearly the same content access before.
Slashdot Mirror
TheSveriges Riksbank Prize in Economic Sciences in Memory of Alfred Nobel(Swedish:Sveriges riksbanks pris i ekonomisk vetenskap till Alfred Nobels minne), commonly referred to as theNobel Prize in Economics,[1][2]is an award for outstanding contributions to the field ofeconomics, generally regarded as the most prestigious award for that field.[3]Although not one of theNobel Prizesestablished by the will ofAlfred Nobelin 1895, it is identified with them, and prizes are announced with and awarded at the same ceremony.
Atleast quote the whole thing. It was not one of the initial nobel prizes, but is awarded by the same body, at the same time, and commonly known as a Nobel prize
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nobel_prize_in_economics
Not sure if grammer nazi, a dick or just ignorant.
But how do you compete against it? Is it ethical as a deterant?
...A very large pile of money.
There is no market pressure to pass on the savings, why would they?
Your speaking of individual value, I am not. As far as price determination, I trust you understand how supply vs demand works. The difference between value and price on each side is the economic incentive to engage in a transaction, aka profits. Without difference between value and price there is no incentive to exchange the good or service for money. I have stated several times that price doesn't inclued externalities, and that is one of the reasons that value, to the market, the true value of a good or service diverges from price.
If you don't grasp that free markets don't encapsulate externalities in prices, and that this often causes trye value to diverge from pruce than whomever paid for your education should demand a refund.
Reread the sentance you quoted. That is where your overlap lies. But as I described, the value to the two parties isn't the whole of the value. Since your stuck on econ 101, can I instead direct you to utility theory. As sophmoric understanding of economics is all that's required to easily see that you infact are intentionally biasing your definition of value.
False. Price has no consideration to externalities. Further, with respect to the two parties engaged in a transaction price is below what te buyer values a good at and above what a seller values it at. The market fan not organiclly set price to value.
You're to poor to understand.
Markets describe price not value.
It doesn't harm the water, but requires you to club a baby seal per megaflop.
Your asking the wrong questions... The real question is why you don't take your RC planes on a fishing trip a few miles off shore, out side of the AOR of the CAA. Just completely remove them. Thousands upon thousands of dollars cheaper.
You failed to notice that he will just keep moving the goal posts.
... and sometimes the right thing to do is kill a few hundred people to prevent something like that from happening again. Evil is a pretty loose concept. I'm by no means an Obama fan. I don't really care for Neo-Cons at all, but the use of force was called for in this instance. Now we have a "peaceful" solution, that will result in a delay of a few weeks, or months, and we will end up needing to blow up Syria for a whole new list of reasons. We want both sides to take heavy losses, and to keep doing that for aslong as possible, while staying inside the boarders of Syria. The asymetry of the conflict is getting in the way of our, unstated, goal so the US will find a way to act. I would prefer that instead of killing people to insure they continue killing eachother, that we kill people to prevent the use of CBRN weapons.
The content of TFA and the views expresed by Dr. Tyson are completely moot. This is just a jumping off point for Libertarians to get fired up about a free market. If they get to call some one dumb it's all the better.
That was kind of his point Dre.
But, I, also, believe that that is a decision that should be left up to the doctors, nurses, and hospitals. I believe that private citizens should band together to voluntarily create funds to provide healthcare for those who cannot otherwise afford it.
That reminds me of a bit in the bible where Jesus said,"Fuck them, if they want healed the market will facilitate it." Private citizens banding togather is often refered to as Government, btw.
Perhaps we could flush out that statment with some foot notes. *IMHO **IMHO ***IANAL [Citation Needed]
Depends on what you mean by relatively safe. Compared to kickboxing a pack of hungry lions, yeah it's relatively safe. Compared to surfing a desk in the bussiness park, taking indirect fire 3 or 4 times a week for 6 months, at a tilt isn't what I would really call relatively safe. The farthest you can get from action in the military is teaching, recruiting or personel in any of the services. There are plenty of non-deployment or low deployment careers, they play a larger role then the service.
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=florida+citrus+canker+residential&l=1#seen
Shut up Meg,
-Peter Griffin
Don't worry, TheDarkMaster. This will facitiltate all kinds of scamming and abuse. It's just a question of who is going to manipulate the market and wipe the wealth of these folks out. Anyone foolish enough to store their wealth in Bitcoins is going to have a bad day. Banks atleast provide a reliable level of tax.
Your right, in many situations genocide would have solved their domestic issues for them.
I think alot of people miss the point hiding in there. The Netflix - DRM model is the direct result of winning the war on DRM. Most consumers are unwilling to actully buy DRM encumbered content for the price that is being charged. Instead there are a few, legal and moral, options left. Movie and Recording Industries have basically deceded that non-DRMed content won't be available at any price. So instead of renting something, and being told we are buying it. We just end up with only rentable content. You can pick from several reasonable rental services, all way cheaper then what you would have paid for nearly the same content access before.