Misplaced Pages

Talk:Consumer sovereignty: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:06, 10 February 2013 editSPECIFICO (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users35,511 edits →The Knowledge Problem of New Paternalism← Previous edit Revision as of 21:23, 10 February 2013 edit undoXerographica (talk | contribs)2,148 edits →The Knowledge Problem of New Paternalism: rubin's red tapeNext edit →
Line 50: Line 50:
::Please see your talk page for a warning. ] ] 21:06, 10 February 2013 (UTC) ::Please see your talk page for a warning. ] ] 21:06, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
:We would need a source (preferrably (p)reliable) that paternalist policymakers are opposed to "consumer soverignty"; they could be paternalistic about actions, rather than than about goods and services. (The parenthetical "p" is (p)silent.) — ] ] 21:03, 10 February 2013 (UTC) :We would need a source (preferrably (p)reliable) that paternalist policymakers are opposed to "consumer soverignty"; they could be paternalistic about actions, rather than than about goods and services. (The parenthetical "p" is (p)silent.) — ] ] 21:03, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
::Ah yes, Rubin's Relentless Red Tape. We need a source about a source about a source about a source. You tightly tie your hands with ridiculous red tape so you can rationalize why you consistently fail to add any content to economic articles. Why don't you first read this source...and ''then'' tell me what additional sources you want me to fetch for you. --] (]) 21:23, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Revision as of 21:23, 10 February 2013

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconBusiness Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Note icon
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconEconomics Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Note icon
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconFinance & Investment Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Note icon
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
WikiProject iconFinance & Investment Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Note icon
This article has been automatically rated by a bot or other tool as Stub-class because it uses a stub template. Please ensure the assessment is correct before removing the |auto= parameter.
WikiProject iconRetailing
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Retailing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of retailing on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.RetailingWikipedia:WikiProject RetailingTemplate:WikiProject RetailingRetailing
Retailing To-do List:

 Here are some tasks awaiting attention:
–When a task is completed, please remove it from the list.

'Consumer sovereignty' does not refer to demand for labor

Last paragraph (below) of the article was deleted:

Does the doctrine of consumer sovereignty imply that the consumers of labor (the employers) are the sovereigns over the time supplied by workers? The neoclassical school, would argue no since workers can choose which employer to work for (as long as the employer will have them). Since the demand for labor is a derived demand what workers produce and how they do it is a direct result of the demand for products, and thus they are sovereigns, albeit at secondhand. Conversely, the Marxian school argues that the concentration of purchasing power in the hands of a small minority (the capitalists) means that the bourgeoisie is the sovereign in both product and labor markets. This is reinforced by the normal existence of the "reserve army of labor" which restricts workers' ability to choose between jobs.

In standard usage (e.g. Campbell R. McConnell and Brue, Economics, 14th ed, p. 68), 'consumer sovereignty' refers to demand by "consumers" of goods and services. "Consumers of labor" above as a synonym for employers is non-standard usage. So, the above violates Misplaced Pages:No original research in adapting consumer sovereignty to the demand for labor by employees. --Thomasmeeks 13:17, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

huh?

The term can prescribe what consumers should be permitted, or describe what consumers are permitted.

Eh? What does this mean? —Tamfang (talk) 07:27, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't really understand it either. So I added a quite understandable passage by Bastiat. --Xerographica (talk) 21:05, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

See also - Scroogenomics, tax choice

I added Scroogenomics and Tax choice but Rubin removed them because they are "tangentially and indirectly relevant". Does anybody else not see the relevance? --Xerographica (talk) 21:14, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Yes. Scroogenomics pertains to how individuals buy gifts for their families and friends, not to the overall concept. It would fit better in Consumer spending. Tax choice is clearly not relevant as it deals with a political topic. – S. Rich (talk) 21:38, 3 February 2013 (UTC)
What's the argument of Scroogenomics? Have you read the reliable sources that I just added to this entry? --Xerographica (talk) 22:25, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

The Knowledge Problem of New Paternalism

Rich removed the following relevant and reliable source from the further reading section...

Here was the explanation that he provided..."rizzo does not discuss CS (only has footnote pertaining to Waldfogel's article)"

Rich, if Rizzo wasn't discussing CS in his paper...then what was he discussing? --Xerographica (talk) 19:50, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

That's a fruitless avenue of discourse, Graphica. If you disagree with Rich's assertion, simply quote the passage from Rizzo that proves you correct and you will have prevailed. It's not appropriate for you to assign chores to Rich. Please consider. SPECIFICO talk 20:05, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Why would Rizzo have a footnote that isn't relevant to some passage in the paper? Either you didn't read Rich's assertion...or... Which is it?
How did Rich find the footnote...but not the relevant passage? Let me guess...he simply searched the paper for "consumer sovereignty" rather than actually read through the paper in order to see if any of the material was relevant to the concept. This article is about the concept...not the term itself. Did you know that Misplaced Pages is not a dictionary? --Xerographica (talk) 20:15, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
It's a waste of time to speculate about what Rich did before he wrote his valid edit. SPECIFICO talk 20:23, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
How do you know his edit is valid? Have you read the paper? Also, I'm still looking forward to your reply... Talk:Government_waste#Removal_of_reliably_sourced_content --Xerographica (talk) 20:25, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Rich is innocent of invalid editing until proven guilty. Please re-read the links I have shared with you. SPECIFICO talk 20:28, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

You have no idea how ridiculously easy it is to prove that Rich's edit was nothing but disruptive. I just go to my database, search for "Rizzo" and then filter down to find the relevant passages...

  • Thus, Waldfogel’s study provides at least suggestive evidence of the difficulty new paternalists will face in crafting wise policies. The basic problem is that paternalist policymakers need a baseline of “true” preferences to satisfy, but the knowledge of such preferences is very hard to access. That individuals sometimes have difficulty determining their own preferences does not mean outsiders will do any better; they can also do worse.
  • If well-meaning policymakers possess all the relevant information about individuals' true preferences, their cognitive biases, and the choice contexts in which they manifest themselves, then policymakers could potentially implement paternalist policies that improve the welfare of individuals by their own standards. But lacking such information, we cannot conclude that actual paternalism will make their decisions better; under a wide range of circumstances, it will even make them worse. New paternalists have not taken the knowledge problems that are evident from the underlying behavioral and economic research seriously enough.

Those are obvious arguments against paternalism and in favor of consumer sovereignty. If you or Rich had actually read the paper then neither of you would be wasting my time with your disruptive editing. --Xerographica (talk) 20:46, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Please see your talk page for a warning. SPECIFICO talk 21:06, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
We would need a source (preferrably (p)reliable) that paternalist policymakers are opposed to "consumer soverignty"; they could be paternalistic about actions, rather than than about goods and services. (The parenthetical "p" is (p)silent.) — Arthur Rubin (talk) 21:03, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Ah yes, Rubin's Relentless Red Tape. We need a source about a source about a source about a source. You tightly tie your hands with ridiculous red tape so you can rationalize why you consistently fail to add any content to economic articles. Why don't you first read this source...and then tell me what additional sources you want me to fetch for you. --Xerographica (talk) 21:23, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
Categories: