I’m not ignorant about the ways the establishment distorts and cherry picks economic data to suit their own interests, I’m refusing to accept and participate in the gaslighting.
That you STILL don’t get it says a lot about you, none of it good.
I know all that too, I’m just using the words for what they stand for. “Economy” isn’t something inherently good, and I don’t like it when peopke try to change the meaning of it. IMO things like PPP is probably way better to measure happiness (but the world still burns), and so on. I’m all for stopping the crazyness aroung infinite growth, and to distribute wealth better. But if we’re going to talk about it, especially on the internet, it’s too easy to not understand eachother if words lose their meaning.
No, you’re stubbornly clinging to a deliberately misleading synecdoche while insisting on missing my point about how it’s misleading and as such should not be perpetuated.
Your own first comment is an excellent example: you responded to a comment about the US economy AS A WHOLE being bad by saying that the cherry picked parts are doing well.
“Economy” isn’t something inherently good
Nobody claimed ANYTHING of the sort. And you accused ME of moving the goalposts?? 🤦
I don’t like it when people try to change the meaning of it.
Then stop aiding and abetting the people doing exactly that.
IMO things like PPP is probably way better to measure happiness
Again with the goalpost moving. Also, no. That’s not a very good way to measure happiness OR the economy as it lumps in spending money you already have with accruing debt, which is also beneficial to the rich and detrimental to everyone else.
I’m all for stopping the crazyness aroung infinite growth, and to distribute wealth better.
I agree, but that’s a completely different discussion. The goalposts are in an entirely different stadium now.
But if we’re going to talk about it, especially on the internet, it’s too easy to not understand eachother if words lose their meaning.
Which is WHY I am insisting on the neutral and comprehensive definition of the word “economy” over the commonly used but inherently misleading one you prefer adhering to.
And you need economic 101.
Words are powerful and should not be subverted.
To each their own.
Edit: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy
Maybe you would like PPP more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purchasing_power_parity
Again: I know all that.
I’m not ignorant about the ways the establishment distorts and cherry picks economic data to suit their own interests, I’m refusing to accept and participate in the gaslighting.
That you STILL don’t get it says a lot about you, none of it good.
I know all that too, I’m just using the words for what they stand for. “Economy” isn’t something inherently good, and I don’t like it when peopke try to change the meaning of it. IMO things like PPP is probably way better to measure happiness (but the world still burns), and so on. I’m all for stopping the crazyness aroung infinite growth, and to distribute wealth better. But if we’re going to talk about it, especially on the internet, it’s too easy to not understand eachother if words lose their meaning.
Have a good day!
No, you’re stubbornly clinging to a deliberately misleading synecdoche while insisting on missing my point about how it’s misleading and as such should not be perpetuated.
Your own first comment is an excellent example: you responded to a comment about the US economy AS A WHOLE being bad by saying that the cherry picked parts are doing well.
Nobody claimed ANYTHING of the sort. And you accused ME of moving the goalposts?? 🤦
Then stop aiding and abetting the people doing exactly that.
Again with the goalpost moving. Also, no. That’s not a very good way to measure happiness OR the economy as it lumps in spending money you already have with accruing debt, which is also beneficial to the rich and detrimental to everyone else.
I agree, but that’s a completely different discussion. The goalposts are in an entirely different stadium now.
Which is WHY I am insisting on the neutral and comprehensive definition of the word “economy” over the commonly used but inherently misleading one you prefer adhering to.
Okay explain to me what economy means.
I already did but ok, one last time if it’ll make you leave me alone:
An economy is the [entire] system or range of economic activity in a country, region, or community.
It’s the production, distribution and trade, as well as consumption of goods and services.
What’s your problem with that definition?
BTW downvotes doesn’t really count here on Lemmy but if that makes you happy…