All i actually said was that progressives seem to be emboldened by his victory to ignore conventional wisdom. Which is basically apparent as anything at this point. You're reading more into my statement than there actually is.



cause if we are to determine these women as laborers, then the only way their labor is rendered less valuable is through direct competition. The woman just looking for a hook up isn't in the same market as the aspiring wife.

But honestly you're imposing a commercial model when it doesn't really fit. The reasons people hook up or get married are a bit (see: a ****ing Iot) different than the reason you decide to hire a new employee.

I don't think you really understand why progressives are truly emboldened though.



Yeah see we aren't talking about "people" seeking sexual copulation, we're talking about "women" seeking sexual copulation, and as far as men are concerned "if you can get the milk for free then why buy the cow", so commercial vs the marriage model is the same model because women worth ****ing or marrying is the exact same good in this instance.

Hm... Good point tbh

But all jokes aside you're ignoring the greater point. Treating people as if they're valuable based on their replaceability causes horrific inequalities based on now their replaceability influences their social status. All the discussions about how this is just how society works doesn't make the reality any less horrific and cruel and undesirable.

I think the idea that being less replaceable makes you more valuable in a market is not some arbitrary rule I came up with but just a natural fact.

I think you're missing the point. Replaceability being a standard for judging people is inhumane and encourages people to be treated inhumanely. In the real world we see this in the treatment of poor workers in actual real life capitalist countries, or in actual real life sweat shops, or in actual real life women who are treated like sluts in a world where women not having sex is valued.

The market viability of the concept kind of is beside the point. How the concept makes life for these people god awful **** is the point. If you thought anything about morality in how society treats people then maybe this would be obvious.

You're overly emotional about a basic economic point tbh

Lemme demonstrate replacability in a nutshell

Going back to the painting example

You find someone to paint your house for 3k. You look at pictures of their work and are satisfied.

Before you complete the deal, someone comes along offering the same quality service for 2.5k.

If you take them... Are you somehow demeaning the humanity of the other guy? Or something similarly dramatic to the drek you just wrote.

Kinda silly to dismiss what's clearly a moral argument by saying that it's not what our current system operates under innit

Like even if I think that Donald Trump should be shot in the head, the certainty of me dying were to try to do so doesn't speak to anything regarding why I think he should be executed.

Yeah no, **** your example. There's a reason I didn't care about your house painting ****. It actively tries to remove the humanity from the equation, and the humanity is the point. You're obfuscating how replaceability affects actual real people by making it about some obscure example that I guess affects nobody. I work with replaceable people who work two jobs to make ends meet, and who pride themselves on not taking government money because it makes them feel less replaceable because being as low on the economic, replaceable ladder as they are has conditioned them to convince anyone who will listen that they're not as replaceable as you might think. This **** is inhumane, not just economically, but psychologically, and all your theory is pretty but ultimately bull****.

The reason I brought up sex and women and sluttiness is because it is not directly an economic issue. It's directly a social issue, and social issues are vastly important in a way that you're ignoring as if economics exists in a white people vacuum.

The argument isn't just that this is what it current system operates under

It's that if you can get the same product for less then give me a good reason for why you should pay more

Plus I'm pretty sure you operate under the same principle when shopping around