In the event that I have readers unfamiliar with the school of Economics, don't shy away. All people have the ability to contribute to this school of thought. In general, all economists study the motivation people have for selecting goods and services with their limited resources. All you need to participate is some personal insight and some curiosity in others rationale for their decisions.
Microeconomics focuses on those atomic level decisions like if you pick whole milk over 2% or a red-colored package over a green-colored package.
Macroeconomics focuses on what happens when all of us make decisions simultaneously, and how policy and/or regulatory actions can be enacted to avoid large scale societal problems.
This #YouTUBE contributor is so good that it's hard to understate how well he presents the #Beauty of #Mathematics. If you are the type of person who self identifies as #BadAtMath, give yourself a second chance. All his videos are hard #Math but you will understand them.
We obviously have much more to talk about than just this one thread. Your specific examples all have merits. I don't know if I can make valid counterclaims that you couldn't make valid counterclaims to, so maybe I'll leave this thread here as it is. An example of intractable counterclaims would be on the topic of restrictive laws. I know some laws are written with wild leeway for the law enforcement authorities (eg. malfunctioning automobile taillight), and I know that they do this for a reason; to detain people without probable cause that would hold up in court whereas the timely circumstantial evidence appears to convict the person of interest. The tail-light stop is nearly never used by authorities, and at times I see them driving with a tail-light out, but if a person driving (in a law-abiding way), inside a matching car that was identified in an armed robbery, with the same number of occupants, the nearby police would make a stop claiming the tail-light was out even if it was functioning (can't prove it wasn't for a moment when he looked). If the routine check on the occupants seemed normal they are let off with a warning, if not, then it escalates. I assume you would argue that this is regularly abused by our racist cops to convict innocent people just so they can claim to have done their job. I would agree. I would counter that if the laws go to the other extreme to heavily protect the innocent (which is what we claim to do), then this will be easily exploited by the people of criminal intent. These are intractable because we must make a subjective decision as to whether we want to convict more innocent people or free more guilty people. It's really hard to decide where to cut the baby in half. I honestly can't decide whether I'd favor a feckless leader with all power or a competent benevolent authoritarian or a de facto deity with no authority running the collective intent of a group of people. Pure democracies seem to be mathematically unstable and rife to break into warring fragments.
Anyway, it appears that while we were arguing, others like the Sylvester McMonkey-McBean's of the world were building a "Star-off machine".
Halfway down they talk about two companies creating countermeasures to video fraud.
In closing, I've never been convinced that Anarchism was a valid approach to life in general due to the state of human nature. I'm not unwilling to have my mind changed, but not in this thread. Start a new one or tag me into an existing one that will get me up to speed on why you think it's a working framework for humanity. eg: I have no idea what this meant
@Michael Rupp coincidentally I have found a great source I can now refer to (feel free to comment on that thread), rather than spend hours in threads trying to word the arguments myself. I feel like I've made my main points here and don't want to go much deeper in this thread either, but for you as well as other readers, let me try to use my newly found source:
I’m not unwilling to have my mind changed
I’ve never been convinced that Anarchism was a valid approach to life in general due to the state of human nature.
While #Federated systems branch & bud to maintain #FreeSpeech in online #SocialNetworks, the "evil" Ad based Megalodons struggle with content moderation. I'm not 100% sure how to moderate my own #Friendica servers when questionable content arises; I know how to delete posts, but it's hard to know why before they arise. My main plan is to not be an #Asshole.