I shared some economics humor back in March, so we’re due for another edition.
This first item warmed my heart, both because of my support for school choice and my disdain for the government education monopoly.
Next we have my response when I’m asked why I’m not a statist.
Our third item is an example of Mitchell’s Law in action.
Plus, it’s always good to mock Keynesian economics.
Next we have Bernie Sanders-style voters expressing their opinions.
I’ve saved the best for last.
When something bad happens, like the 2008 financial crisis, some folks on the left blame “greed.”
I freely acknowledge that greed exists, but I ask them whether the crowd on Wall Street was greedy in other years, like 1998 and 1988.
So maybe, just maybe, there is another explanation for why we had a financial and housing meltdown.
The same analysis applies the recent complaints that egg companies were jacking up prices because of greed.
Too bad our left-leaning friends don’t understand the price system. Maybe they should watch these videos.
P.S. Pre-2023 examples of economics humor can be found here, here, here, here, and here.
[…] shared four columns of economics humor in 2023 (March, August, November, and December), so we’re due for our first 2024 […]
[…] though I added to the collection of economics humor just last month (as well as in August and March), I have more items that are worth […]
[…] Time for the third (and presumably final) collection of economics humor for 2023 (previous versions here and here). […]
The insurance industry openly admitted this year that as customers decrease coverage to lower their premiums to save money, the loss of revenue has prompted insurers to raise rates in order to recover the lost revenue. So… they ARE, by their own admission, raising prices purely for profit.
The meme with the endless loop is good, but it’s vague. The USFS, for example, does this: demand government $$ (our money!) for “forestry” which entails dropping fuels onto once-bare and fire-averse forest floors, season upon season (“thinning” is one term). They they say, “we’ve identified an area with high fire risk due to so much down and dead fuels” and demand yet more of our $$ to “fix” the problem– that we paid them to create! Then they brutally clear the entire area of most (if not all) trees as well as vegetation, thus clear-cutting an area. But not salvaging one single board-foot, nor even replanting.
The bare acres cannot save snowpack, which now exposed to the sun and wind merely evaporates away, never having a chance to melt into the soil or recharge aquifers. Severe Drought designation in those exact areas were made this year. The areas cleared fill in with not trees but weeds and brush, in some cases not even five years later becoming a 20-foot high sea of fire-prone thickets which deer or elk with antlers cannot get through. And before that, when fire comes to the wide-open and dry-as-a-bone landscapes it allows fire to whip into a frenzy.
The USFS is deforesting faster than any logging company is even allowed to, they are intentionally worsening fire risk by dropping live (harvestable) trees and leaving them down to dry and become fuel, and devastating our water resources by exposing snowpack all the way upstream to sun and wind. The forest is mangled, ruined, and badly sick.
And they are doing this all on our dime. Bad policy=blame forestry companies=more USFS spending=worse forests… and equals yet more bad policy.
The Forest Service is a SCAM.
Denial is very strong on the Left. It has to be for reality is a persistent b*tch and will reassert itself with gusto…like gravity as soon as the efforts to resist it begin to degrade in strength for any reason.