this post was submitted on 04 Jun 2024
32 points (90.0% liked)

World News

39346 readers
3643 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 2 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] worldwidewave 4 points 6 months ago

In the evening, the president spoke at Stanford University and caused controversy when, addressing poverty, he said that people will “figure out a way not to starve to death” and that there was no need to intervene because “in the end someone will solve” the issue.

You’re the president, the buck stops with you. It’s so incredibly lazy to assume NGOs will pick up the slack from your poor leadership.

[–] Shardikprime -1 points 6 months ago

The "controversy" they talk about is when He is talking about market failures and brings up the "externalities" that are the side effects (which can be negative or positive, but when talking about a market failure you are talking only about the negative) that occur when producing or consuming.

A well-known example for externalities is pollution: I am a company, I produce, but I "externalize" the expenses associated with my production by throwing waste into the environment (something we pay as a society when in reality the responsibility is private).

But that is an externality in production.

He speaks of an externality in consumption that would be when the side effect arises from the fact of consuming.

Now those are similar, but for consumption.

For example, the case of the pandemic in the USA when the people were going to the supermarkets to stock up on toilet paper, leaving them empty. The negative externality of consumption there is that there are people who couldn't wash their butts

I hope that makes sense

In this case, bringing it to the example of toilet paper, the guy is saying something like that, eventually, people are going to stink so much that they are going to look for an alternative to toilet paper. Therefore, proving that the market did not fail because it was actually part of the market discovery process.

Now, it is one thing to think that he is wrong and another different thing to not understand what he's referring to.

And whatever the case, it is true that cutting the context is quite hypocritical and biased because it is talking about a hypothetical situation where he counterargues using absurdity.

That is, regardless of what you may think about what he said or whatever his argument exactly is, it is certain that he is not referring to what we all understood when we read the subtitle of the news.