| ▲ | helterskelter 21 hours ago |
| Ie, a junk economy. None of this produces value, if anything it's parasitic. |
|
| ▲ | nomel 21 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| This is a good thing. If the economy was driven by essentials, it would mean we were in a VERY VERY bad place. Luckily, our economy is mostly based on luxury items, by world standards. |
| |
| ▲ | computably 20 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Luxury for luxury's sake only covers the opposite extreme of essentials. Innovation often involves non-essentials, considered luxuries early on, and sometimes becoming so ubiquitous that they become new essentials, for better or worse. Cars, AC, phones, computers, internet, smartphones... There's nothing intrinsically wrong with producing entertainment, internet communities, or branded merch. But I don't think it's that controversial to say "micro-influencer selling/sponsoring merch" is not the optimal career path for most of the people that pursue it. | | |
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 20 hours ago | parent [-] | | > Luxury for luxury's sake At least in my circles, the Instagram gadgets are one part junk, one part failed execution and half genuinely-clever niche objects and services. A silly kitchen tool I low-key love is a domestially-made all-steel tofu press. A friend found it on Instagram. |
| |
| ▲ | helterskelter 21 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I certainly don't believe everything should be based on essentials, but when very little growth is from honest to god innovation which produces more or better of something, and isn't valued based solely on its anticipated future returns, or isn't based on innovation which only extracts more from the consumer while providing the same or less in return, I'm a little pessimistic. One day somebody who does innovate will eat your lunch. When too much of your economy is based on services or luxury goods, you're sitting on a house of cards. | |
| ▲ | paxys 20 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | The "luxury items" economy is junk made for $3 in a chinese factory and drop shipped to someone who paid $55 after clicking on an AI-generated Instagram ad. |
|
|
| ▲ | slashdave 21 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| In a simple way, money = value. If someone is "paying", there is demand. |
| |
| ▲ | bad_haircut72 20 hours ago | parent [-] | | Is this what Adam Smith had in mind? Say I pay Facebook $10000 to generate demand for $12000 worth of funny slogan tshirts sales, is that overall an efficient use of our resources? | | |
| ▲ | slashdave 20 hours ago | parent [-] | | Does "value" have to be "efficient"? I am not in the habit of judging other people's values. If it makes someone happy, why not? Of course: capitalism. So slippery slope and all that. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | melonmars 21 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| if someone buys it, is that not producing value? |
| |
| ▲ | jimbob45 21 hours ago | parent [-] | | Surely you’d agree that cigarettes are parasitic, no? | | |
| ▲ | 8note 21 hours ago | parent [-] | | no - the cigarettes are providing some value to the smoker in terms of relaxation. parasitic would be a one-way setup where only the cigarette provider benefits |
|
|
|
| ▲ | iambenm 21 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Hmm, do video games fall into the same category? |
| |
| ▲ | helterskelter 21 hours ago | parent [-] | | Perhaps by some measure, but what I'm referring to is how everything is becoming a fly by night scam-adjacent "product" that isn't much better than Alibaba drop shipping. | | |
| ▲ | nl 21 hours ago | parent [-] | | I think you underestimate the value that "filtering by a trusted source" provides. | | |
| ▲ | readread 21 hours ago | parent [-] | | What are the "trusted sources" that are better than Amazon (which is itself no better than Aliexpress)? Or Walmart, or target, or Newegg, which, ditto? I buy straight from brands I trust whenever possible, not even trusting Amazon as an intermediary between us. Those brands aren't selling alibaba-dropshipper stuff. I'd say my trust in stores that sell more than their own brand is at an all-time low. You have enshittifying mid-range department stores where you can't trust a thing, fake "outlet" stores, et c. I sort-of trust REI. I sort-of trust Costco. End of list, maybe? Like if there's value being delivered in the "trusted source" sphere for a general retailer, I'm not seeing much of it. Quite the opposite, that's all gotten worse steadily this century. | | |
| ▲ | nl 11 hours ago | parent [-] | | Trusted sources = influencers For example, when I'm buying a synthesizer I watch lots of Youtube reviews. I know the influencers are paid or given goods but if you watch a person over while you get to understand their biases. |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | rwallace 21 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Eh. There are certainly things wrong with today's economy, starting with housing being treated as a financial asset, which encourages laws that create an artificial scarcity of it. I'm not saying there is nothing to complain about. But the fact that not everyone is working purely to create necessities, that some of our economic output consists of luxuries? I don't really see that as a problem to be solved. If anything, I think it's a good sign. Let's not fall into the trap of just randomly complaining about everything. |
|
| ▲ | HoldOnAMinute 21 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Everyone is housed and well-fed, so we're using planetary energy resources to create dopamine hits for beer money |
| |
| ▲ | denkmoon 21 hours ago | parent [-] | | Not everyone is housed and well fed. Homelessness in the US is at a 20 year high. Same for Australia. |
|
