#the sneaky corona virus.

submitted by mommysexsworker from self.politics

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

I'm in Canada and my income has not increased, but my food bill has.

That only suggests food shortages if you assume the efficient market hypothesis, but monopolies, monopsonies and the fact you don't haggle on food prices means it could be price fixing or something algorithmic. (Obviously you have other reasons to suspect this, too, but just wanted to point out the obvious for everyone else.)

Sad to see that Canada's going that way, too.

You're digging yourself a cop out. If farms are sabotaged that also counts.

I know. I'm only exempting shortages due to changes in demand, not changes in supply; the latter is basically the definition of food shortage.

P.S.: Please don't buy into the false dichotomy “safety or liberty”. Assume, for a moment, that COVID-19 is a problem. You can have both.

[–]JasonCarswellVoluntaryist 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

My statement about Canadian food doesn't mean there are or aren't food shortages. It only means the corporations are demanding more, regardless of the reasons. That said, I expect food to become a problem. If I could recall where I'd link you, but on several occasions since this started I've heard that the 2 best ways to control a population is via disease and food scarcity.

TIL: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopsony + /s/Terminology/comments/6ng0/monopsony_in_economics_is_a_market_structure_in/

/s/Canada has worse things happening down the road.

You can't have it all. Come to me for computer animation (or any other product or service) and you can only ever have up to 2/3 of these: quality, sooner, cheaper. 33% is always compromised.

I'll always take liberty over safety and choose for myself rather than have my fate decided from on high.

Fuck assuming COVID-19 is a problem. It's clearly not. Perhaps COVID-21 will be a superior bioweapon, and we should be wary. But pretending it's a threat when it's an OBVIOUS excuse for tyranny is a stupid waste of time.

[–]wizzwizz4 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

the 2 best ways to control a population is via disease and food scarcity.

Those are ways to control a rebellious subset of the population; that wouldn't work on a national scale, and it certainly wouldn't work given media coverage the interconnectedness brought by the internet … Okay, that's scary, but I still think … okay, I'm not confident that everyone with the power to do that kind of thing wouldn't, but surely there must be other people with that kind of power who would stop it, instead of just being a bystand…   Well, I'd still bet against it.

But back to my point: a combination of fear and the true belief that the leaders can protect from that fear would be a better way to control the population, and there are easier, more effective ways to do that than food shortages and disease. The position of elected government official couldn't really profit from control gathered via food shortages and disease.

Come to me for computer animation (or any other product or service) and you can only ever have up to 2/3 of these: quality, sooner, cheaper.

Wait, you were able to pull off good, fast and cheap at the same time? :-| My understanding of economics says you must care about your work.

But pretending it's a threat when it's an OBVIOUS excuse for tyranny is a stupid waste of time.

It can be both.