Hey Dan

[Dän]

I eat and drink heaps of shit then work it off, is that inefficient? Excersize is a great stress relief, so if i didnt need to do it, by eating shit all day, then I would be worse off.

And you'll find that a major component of economics is solely dedicated to studying individuals and how individuals behave and is not concerned with the aggregate, so to suggest that economists as a whole are uncaring people who only strive for efficiency and the bottom line is wrong, and you know it is. People make extreme claims when they lack any confidence in their own opinions, who lack understanding, and feel the need to draw attention to their distorted views of reality by making false claims. Unfortunately, because most people are dumb arses, such people get listened to...and end up running the Labor party HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

There's some efficiency for you pinko's HAHAHAHAHAHA

 

[Dän]

When i gave that article on farming I was just trying to who you that farms, or any firm, is going to have larger economies of scale and lower average total costs, enabling it to make a more efficient use of the restricted farm lands. I don't understand why you would object to this reasoning, given that you have stated that we are running out of decent farm land.

 

[KoichCPA]

The economies of scale thoery fails though when you get to the public service. The government is the biggest employer in this country, and it's allso by far the most fucking inefficient.

Small farms equal small business, you cannot deny people a legitimate income and you cannot have larger farms having a monopoly on food growing. Having a monopoly is not so good for the consumer.

 

[Bucko]

Yes you are probably true on that first point ... mm were do I work again

 

[Shannow]

Also, having all of your eggs in one basket (monoculture of a single strain) as used in high yield farming is a recipe for disaster.

 

[Dän]

The economies of scale thoery fails though when you get to the public service. The government is the biggest employer in this country, and it's allso by far the most fucking inefficient.

Small farms equal small business, you cannot deny people a legitimate income and you cannot have larger farms having a monopoly on food growing. Having a monopoly is not so good for the consumer.

Gov owned monopolies will always perform at a loss and always be inefficient, that is the precise reason why they are not privately owned. Having monopolies can, in certain cases, be far more beneficial for consumers, monopolies are created, at times, on that sole basis, but i was by no means advocating a monopoly scenario in regards to farming.

 

[Shannow]

Gov owned monopolies will always perform at a loss and always be inefficient

bullshit.

In 2003/04, the NSW Power Industry returned $358M in tax, and $600M in dividend to the state Govt.

that is the precise reason why they are not privately owned.

Too competetive at this stage for private interests to invest in new Generation, that's why we are going to be privatised.

Having monopolies can, in certain cases, be far more beneficial for consumers, monopolies are created, at times, on that sole basis

you betcyha. Wait until we are privatised, then the electricity consumer will really get to pay for their electricity....stock up on candles.

 

[Goreripper]

Gov owned monopolies will always perform at a loss and always be inefficient,

Sure, like Telstra pre-deregulation. A real loss-making business that one.

 

[Goreripper]

Having monopolies can, in certain cases, be far more beneficial for consumers

Sure they are, so long as the consumers are also shareholders. The difference between a Government corporation and a private one is, the Government corporation is answerable to the electorate, the private one only to its shareholders.