Ok, so you presented a theory of how our subjective evaluations work, but how is this connected to market prices? Is it a statistical relationship of all the subjective evaluations, and how would you know that? The example you gave was an abstraction of an economy which only has two persons, each producing only one distinct commodity, and bargaining with each other for an exchange. This is a very artificial abstraction; our economy does not work like this at all. People are already presented with money prices, which they evaluate things against. So our subjective evaluations are already dependent on preset market prices. We also don't bargain for goods in supermarkets and department stores, we only have a choice to buy or not buy.
Another example: buying a hardback, buying a paperback, buying an ebook, buying a used book, lending from the library. These all have different money and time prices and all but one are arguably for the same thing. You will find a single person put different format-prices on different books. The formats exist to try to capture more people with more personal prices.
Depends what you mean. Ideas aren't because they aren't scarce and economic goods, by definition, are scarce. Ideas aren't scarce, because they can be copied indefinitely (of course the limit is digital or biological space to copy them into, but that doesn't really matter). Thinking, however, is scarce. If what you mean by thinking is an hour of thinking, for example. Because the amount of hours a mind can think in a day is limited. So, thinking, the process by which ideas are created is scarce, but once ideas are created their scarcity is negligible, because they can be copied at next to no cost and with virtually no limit (at least according to general theory).
In a more sophisticated sense, all these terms aren't about binary (yes or no) questions, but about where it is on a spectrum. If something is more scarce (and controllable and valuable) it is an economic good to a greater degree.
Awesome Lecture Professor Hulsmann!!
To the outstanding folks at Mises.org: THANK YOU for all your hard work. One minor suggestion: the shorter talks are nice, but so are the longer ones!
Based Jörg-Guido Hulsmann!
Ok, so you presented a theory of how our subjective evaluations work, but how is this connected to market prices? Is it a statistical relationship of all the subjective evaluations, and how would you know that?
The example you gave was an abstraction of an economy which only has two persons, each producing only one distinct commodity, and bargaining with each other for an exchange. This is a very artificial abstraction; our economy does not work like this at all. People are already presented with money prices, which they evaluate things against. So our subjective evaluations are already dependent on preset market prices. We also don't bargain for goods in supermarkets and department stores, we only have a choice to buy or not buy.
We pick where we shop based on the prices we are willing to pay. That’s why idiots make Whole Foods successful.
Another example: buying a hardback, buying a paperback, buying an ebook, buying a used book, lending from the library. These all have different money and time prices and all but one are arguably for the same thing. You will find a single person put different format-prices on different books. The formats exist to try to capture more people with more personal prices.
25:22 out of context it starts sounding like a talk about sex. I'm sorry. :)
Great talk.
Is thinking an economic good?
***** i'm sure ideas are
***** our bodies are economic goods, which includes the brain and its functions. People rent our services
PraxeoLiberty currency is an economic good,
Depends what you mean. Ideas aren't because they aren't scarce and economic goods, by definition, are scarce. Ideas aren't scarce, because they can be copied indefinitely (of course the limit is digital or biological space to copy them into, but that doesn't really matter).
Thinking, however, is scarce. If what you mean by thinking is an hour of thinking, for example. Because the amount of hours a mind can think in a day is limited.
So, thinking, the process by which ideas are created is scarce, but once ideas are created their scarcity is negligible, because they can be copied at next to no cost and with virtually no limit (at least according to general theory).
In a more sophisticated sense, all these terms aren't about binary (yes or no) questions, but about where it is on a spectrum. If something is more scarce (and controllable and valuable) it is an economic good to a greater degree.
What a beautiful man