Conservative economics has a temporal bias: immediate costs are ‘real’ while long-term benefits are ‘speculative.’ Hence infrastructure and education are ‘expenses’ rather than investments. It’s temporal discounting elevated to political philosophy.

@forthy42 @Daojoan +1

One cannot sustain infinite exponential growth (as mandated per law for these firms) on a finite rotational ellipsoid (earth) cuz even if a product is as essential and universally "sellable" as drinking water, at some point everyone has maxed out their ability to "consume MORE":

  • One can only drink as much water every day until they collapse.
  • One can only store & stockpile so much water.
  • Faucets and water infrastructure only have a limited capacity and flow rate.
  • People can only afford to buy so much of it.
  • There can only be a finite number of customers.
  • There's only a finite amount of drinking water available at any given time.
  • There's only a finite amount of area & energy available to setup and operate water treatment plants.

If someone were to unsarcastically demand a toddler to grow exponentially for the rest of their life, they'd be declared insane on the spot and if they attempted to actually try that they'd hopefully get jailed for child abuse before they could cause any permanent damages.

  • Yet in economics we accept that as a legitimate form of running an enterprise.

https://infosec.space/@kkarhan/114493142633669460

Kevin Karhan :verified: (@[email protected])

@[email protected] and exactly that is the absurdity of it. - If they were forced to do this full circle, they'd essentially shut down everthing, sell off all the assets and cash out. Oh nevermind, that's the whole #ManagmentCulture for the last 30+ years where some #ValueRemoving #Manager just kills R&D, cashes out bonuses and when the company dies in 5-25 years their successors' successor is forced to hold the bag. - I've seen that in #IT and elsewhere…

Infosec.Space