Wasn't sure where to put this?

Originally posted by joe shmo
Are you purposing that this 'thermoeconomic model' is just a black box (as googlefudge stated)?

Yes I was. I was also pointing out that it may not be an accurate one.

There is nothing wrong with exploring whether the rules of one system are equivalent to the rules in another system. It is however an error to think that because some rules appear equivalent then other as yet untested rules will also be equivalent.

Worst of all though is drawing analogies because you want an analogy not because there is any real similarity. So when you start twisting the meaning of things beyond recognition just to get an analogy then there is a problem.

Originally posted by joe shmo
lets say I give you 10 dollars for some good, and then I make 5 dollars from re-selling that good,what recieves the difference...the economy?

Yes. The general population. That's the thing - entropy only applies to a closed system. That's why entropy on Earth can go up, and has done so for the last, well, ever since it formed: because it makes use of the massive entropy decline by the sun.

If debt is entropy, the entire Earth's economy must be seen as this "closed system", since hardly anyone is outside it. Certainly nobody who gives or receives dollars is. But then, as we've seen demonstrated so amply over the last couple of decades, the total amount of "money" and "debt" in this system can go both up and down to astonishing, nay ridiculous, extent. That does not sound like an entropy-analogue to me at all.

Richard

Originally posted by joe shmo
lets say I give you 10 dollars for some good, and then I make 5 dollars from re-selling that good,what recieves the difference...the economy?

If the good was worth 10 dollars, then the person you sold it to, got to save 5 dollars, so he gains.
If the good was worth 5 dollars, then the person you bought is from over charged by 5 dollars so he gains.
Of course it may be something in between, and the good may even change in value over time.
But I cant understand why Shallow Blue thinks the general population gets anything out of it. When you get poorer, does the value of the dollar in general go up?

Originally posted by twhitehead
But I cant understand why Shallow Blue thinks the general population gets anything out of it. When you get poorer, does the value of the dollar in general go up?

I'm not sure I claimed exactly that. In fact, I'm not sure that that's how it works at all. It is true, though, that there's such a thing as inflation. It's also true that inflation has no analogue in thermodynamics.

Note, I don't claim that the way inflation works in our current economic model makes sense. What I claim is that, because the economy does - for many and varied reasons - work rather differently than the thermodynamic model of the Earth, entropy cannot be a real equivalent of debt.
There may be holes in my understanding of the economy. There probably are. No, make that: there certainly are. But they're neither as large nor as many as there are in the posited analogy.

Richard

Are there correlations between a city's age, and its economic health? My intuition tells me that there are, and it seems to me they are opposite of (at least in biological life) the laws of the natural world?

Originally posted by joe shmo
Are there correlations between a city's age, and its economic health? My intuition tells me that there are, and it seems to me they are opposite of (at least in biological life) the laws of the natural world?

I don't think there is any reasonable analogy to be drawn between the two. They both have an age, but thats about it.
Many multicellular organisms grow from a single cell, to a large healthy multicellular organim which over time ages, then dies of old age. But this is not a hard and fast rule. Many life forms propagate via other methods and some are essentially immortal.
A cities economic health depends on what its economy is based on (why it was founded) and the various economic influences over time. Age does have some strong influences because infrastructure etc is built up over time strengthening its economy (in most cases). In some cases however poor city planing or over dependency on a single economic factor results in eventual decay. There are no hard and fast rules.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I don't think there is any reasonable analogy to be drawn between the two. They both have an age, but thats about it.
Many multicellular organisms grow from a single cell, to a large healthy multicellular organim which over time ages, then dies of old age. But this is not a hard and fast rule. Many life forms propagate via other methods and some are esse ...[text shortened]... ndency on a single economic factor results in eventual decay. There are no hard and fast rules.

Perfectly correct.

How many capital cities of Thailand have there been in the last 1,000 years?

Moved and moved, thru results of lost wars etc.

Most capital cities remain as intact.

However, to note, Thailand is the only country in the world that has never been occupied. Would that be a cause and effect to the capital having had to move so many times?

There's a brain twister for some. 😉

-m.

Originally posted by mikelom
However, to note, Thailand is the only country in the world that has never been occupied.

Tell that to the Karen - if you can find one who hasn't been massacred off yet.

Richard

(Also, Birma briefly occupied Siam.)

Originally posted by bbarr
If we're to take the entropy analogy seriously, then there should be some sort of loss (expressible in economic terms) attending every economic transaction. There is some sort of loss that attends every deviation from Pareto-optimality. But that is analytic; it's what defines Pareto-optimality. If I exchange $5 for your frosty pint of beer, and I value it a ...[text shortened]... what the market has established as a going price for pints? I guess I'm just confused here.

What do we call taxes then, if I value the $5 and not the $1.32 lost to taxes?
Kelly 🙂