Ancestors

Written by Cory Doctorow on 2025-01-11 at 19:02

The social function of the economics profession is to explain, over and over again, that your boss is actually right and that you don't really want the things you want, and you're secretly happy to be abused by the system.

--

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this thread to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2025/01/11/socialism-for-the-wealthy/#rugged-individualism-for-the-poor

1/

=> View attached media

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from pluralistic

Written by Cory Doctorow on 2025-01-11 at 19:02

If that wasn't true, why would your "choose" commercial surveillance, abusive workplaces and other depredations?

In other words, economics is the "look what you made me do" stick that capitalism uses to beat us with. We wouldn't spy on you, rip you off or steal your wages if you didn't choose to use the internet, shop with monopolists, or work for a shitty giant company. The technical name for this ideology is "public choice theory":

https://pluralistic.net/2022/06/05/regulatory-capture/

2/

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from pluralistic

Written by Cory Doctorow on 2025-01-11 at 19:02

Of all the terrible things that economists say we all secretly love, one of the worst is "price discrimination." This is the idea that different customers get charged different amounts based on the merchant's estimation of their ability to pay. Economists insist that this is "efficient" and makes us all better off.

3/

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from pluralistic

Written by Cory Doctorow on 2025-01-11 at 19:03

After all, the marginal cost of filling the last empty seat on the plane is negligible, so why not sell that seat for peanuts to a flier who doesn't mind the uncertainty of knowing whether they'll get a seat at all? That way, the airline gets extra profits, and they split those profits with their customers by lowering prices for everyone. What's not to like?

4/

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from pluralistic

Written by Cory Doctorow on 2025-01-11 at 19:03

Plenty, as it turns out. With only four giant airlines who've carved up the country so they rarely compete on most routes, why would an airline use their extra profits to lower prices, rather than, say, increasing their dividends and executive bonuses?

For decades, the airline industry was the standard-bearer for price discrimination. It was basically impossible to know how much a plane ticket would cost before booking it.

5/

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from pluralistic

Toot

Written by Magnus Ahltorp on 2025-01-12 at 10:33

@pluralistic This makes very little sense to me. Yes, oligopolies are bad, but if there’s price fixing and/or unreasonable profits, that is the case with or without price discrimination. If the prices were set without any competition, then they could always charge high prices, and people would always buy them, and they wouldn’t have to use price discrimination at all.

Also, airlines are a really bad example, since they are heavily subsidised by unpaid externalities.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from ahltorp@mastodon.nu

Descendants

Written by Magnus Ahltorp on 2025-01-12 at 10:34

@pluralistic Otherwise, great article.

=> More informations about this toot | More toots from ahltorp@mastodon.nu