So you don’t have an answer, that’s fine, figured as much. Hand waiving, indeed.
Irrational actors are unpredictable in compounding ways. The concept is a meta analysis of the individual and the masses. Biases, irrational fear, herd dynamics, etc. These can lead to unpredictable outcomes.
But markets can still function, sometimes, because of other factors. Leverage, venture investment, loss management, mergers and acquisition, etc. And learning from witnessing a counterintuitive market dynamic.
In this, most basic example, there are no compounding factors in either case. There are no buyers. So, their irrationally is not a factor. And there is only production of a supply that has no demand.
Someone producing a degradable product that has no buyers is not what is meant when discussing irrational actors.
It’s not referring to some crazy person who will just operate at a loss forever. And even if it was, they couldn’t even do it forever if they wanted to.
Dodging the question, plugging your ears, and saying, “I heard a term one time that says they could be crazy and would just keep doing it forever for no reason. Prove me wrong.” Is not the gotcha argument you think it is.
You still don’t understand basic markets, huh. That’s unfortunate.
I understand that markets are populated by irrational actors.
That’s not relevant. This issue is more basic than that. It’s the most basic.
Out of morbid curiosity. Hypotheticaly, why or how do you think a producer would continue to operate at full scale with no buyers?
saying it’s basic is hand waiving. say what you mean.
So you don’t have an answer, that’s fine, figured as much. Hand waiving, indeed.
Irrational actors are unpredictable in compounding ways. The concept is a meta analysis of the individual and the masses. Biases, irrational fear, herd dynamics, etc. These can lead to unpredictable outcomes.
But markets can still function, sometimes, because of other factors. Leverage, venture investment, loss management, mergers and acquisition, etc. And learning from witnessing a counterintuitive market dynamic.
In this, most basic example, there are no compounding factors in either case. There are no buyers. So, their irrationally is not a factor. And there is only production of a supply that has no demand.
Someone producing a degradable product that has no buyers is not what is meant when discussing irrational actors.
It’s not referring to some crazy person who will just operate at a loss forever. And even if it was, they couldn’t even do it forever if they wanted to.
Dodging the question, plugging your ears, and saying, “I heard a term one time that says they could be crazy and would just keep doing it forever for no reason. Prove me wrong.” Is not the gotcha argument you think it is.
Basic markets are not capitalism.
no one proposed that but you