Is it really wise to equate "less and less costly" with "less and less valuable"? The labor, perhaps. But the outputs?
Saying that the cost of purchasing a unit of x drops when the cost of producing a unit of x drops is uninteresting. It just seems to me that you're shoehorning in some confusion (about marginal vs. total value, maybe?) in order to say something that sounds more interesting.
-
-
But there's something else, I think? A country that produces 10,000,000 light bulbs generates more value than a country that produces 10 light bulbs, even if the sale price for each bundle were somehow equivalent. People use light bulbs *to do things they want to do.*
-
If light bulbs were in very limited supply & thus extremely costly, you'd likely only see them used by people who had extremely valuable things to do at night. By even a colloquial definition, the marginal value of a light bulb would be much higher... in a much poorer world.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.