all the people involved in those markets were making decisions distinct from the people making decisions in the milk market. I dont think we can find anything so conclusive.
Dosen’t matter if it happens or not. It’s it’s not required to prove the case because of the overwhelming evidence in every other market where it has. The idea that something will be produced at a loss forever just because you can’t accept that it won’t is troll-level ludicrous. So, hats of to you for that bait, I guess.
I’m not going to believe something without evidence. your hand waiving is not evidence, and historical data about irrational actors is not predictive about the future of those same markets. it can’t be reliable evidence about the future in a separate market.
what caused any of those declines? could those events happen in the milk market? were any of those markets as ancient as milk? how else might they differ?
The events were that demand decreased. Yes, demand could decrease in the milk market. Whether or not it will is a separate question. They are different in that the market decreased in the former and not the latter.
how do you suppose we could decrease demand? do you have some method to accomplish this?
edit:what is the metric by which you gauge demand? price? volume sold? volume produced? futures markets? I just don’t think this is a well formulated test. but if you come up with one, please let me know.
to be clear, you have made an assertion without evidence. a claim made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. I don’t believe you, and no one should.
Every decreased market that ever existed should be sufficient. Fondue pots and miter boxes should get you there.
that’s not a test. it’s a survey. I’m looking for a test for your theory. I think it is undisprovable.
all the people involved in those markets were making decisions distinct from the people making decisions in the milk market. I dont think we can find anything so conclusive.
We can. There’s no way a commodity will be produced at scale without a market for it. It happens all the time. This is some high in a dorm level cope.
if it’s so certain then there must be some way to prove it. you haven’t provided any test.
Here’s the test, everyone stops buying milk. Go.
do you have a plan to make that happen?
Dosen’t matter if it happens or not. It’s it’s not required to prove the case because of the overwhelming evidence in every other market where it has. The idea that something will be produced at a loss forever just because you can’t accept that it won’t is troll-level ludicrous. So, hats of to you for that bait, I guess.
I’m not going to believe something without evidence. your hand waiving is not evidence, and historical data about irrational actors is not predictive about the future of those same markets. it can’t be reliable evidence about the future in a separate market.
Lol. How about this experiment. You produce something nobody buys and see how long it lasts. Remind me in, idgaf, you’re a troll.
did it work?
You still don’t understand basic markets, huh. That’s unfortunate.
I understand that markets are populated by irrational actors.
That’s not relevant. This issue is more basic than that. It’s the most basic.
Out of morbid curiosity. Hypotheticaly, why or how do you think a producer would continue to operate at full scale with no buyers?
@remindme@mstdn.social 1 month
what caused any of those declines? could those events happen in the milk market? were any of those markets as ancient as milk? how else might they differ?
The events were that demand decreased. Yes, demand could decrease in the milk market. Whether or not it will is a separate question. They are different in that the market decreased in the former and not the latter.
how do you suppose we could decrease demand? do you have some method to accomplish this?
edit:what is the metric by which you gauge demand? price? volume sold? volume produced? futures markets? I just don’t think this is a well formulated test. but if you come up with one, please let me know.
None of this requires your approval, and the world will keep turning regardless of your ignorance.
to be clear, you have made an assertion without evidence. a claim made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. I don’t believe you, and no one should.
To be clear, you are simply ignorant and think people are going to produce rotting milk forever without a customer base for no reason.
I didn’t say that. you asserted the opposite, though, and I pointed out you can’t support your claim.
So you don’t think milk will be produced without the demand to support it. Tight. We’re in agreement. Salut.