Is coffee-shop coffee too expensive?

[MOBIUS]

Originally posted by Traianvs


Yup you're right on that one. Newcastle simply has to be the worst, depressing, uninteresting city I've ever visited... Well that and Glasgow, but the sun was shining at the time so at least I could see all the attractive ladies wearing obscenely short tops & shorts. If only they'd at least try to lose some weight but anyways going a bit off-topic here

What is it with you foreigners...?

You have a whole country to go full of amazing attractions, and you pick places like Newcastle!!?

I've never been to Newcastle! Don't get me wrong, I'm not avoiding the place, it's just low on my list of priorities cos there's better things to see IMO before I get there (coincidentally I will be visiting in August!)...

Newcastle's main claim to fame is as a nightclubbing town where everyone gets off their tits on drink, if you want stonehenge - you've come to the wrong place!!!

[MOBIUS]

BTW Traianvs, there's plenty of your country that's ugly, dirty, sleazy, dangerous - whatever... But unlike you and Aggie, I don't zero in on those not insubstantial areas of places like Brussells and Antwerp. Belgium is a laughing stock to most people, but I happen to like it a lot.

Same for Aggie, next time I go on holiday to NZ I am going to visit South Auckland and base my entire opinion of the country on my experiences there...

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by Traianvs


Yup you're right on that one. Newcastle simply has to be the worst, depressing, uninteresting city I've ever visited... Well that and Glasgow, but the sun was shining at the time so at least I could see all the attractive ladies wearing obscenely short tops & shorts. If only they'd at least try to lose some weight but anyways going a bit off-topic here

I got to see a huge part of Belgium from a train including a most unflattering view of Antwerp and the rest doesn't look up to much. It was a sigh of relief to reach the Dutch border...

[Colon™]

For ****'s sake, the guy has land of plenty corruption in his location field. You think that's going to get to him?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
I read a few paragraghs about him a year and a half ago, but it was my impression that conspicuous consumption isn't particularly controversial (at least, its existance), Poly aside.

a very good book on positional goods, about 30 years ago, was "The Social Limits to Growth"

Of course the fact that a good works as a positional good, doesnt mean it ONLY works as a positional good (if everyone went from driving Hondas to Ferraris, they would probably still have a better driving experience, even if they lost the majority of the "benefit" that today comes from a Ferrari)

Im skeptical of the ability of the legislatures to discern exactly which goods are primarily positional and which are not, and to what extent. That would be the case even if every legislator was of perfect integrity, and was attempting to honestly answer the question, and not respond to the economic interests of constituencie ("Ferraris are positional goods and should suffer a luxury tax, but large boats add real value to peoples lives, and my saying it has nothing to do with the fact that theres a big yacht factory in my district that employs hundreds") So while believing in the existence of positional goods, I dont think it necessarily makes luxury taxes a desirable public policy.

At most I would say it makes progressive income taxes somewhat better public policy than they would otherwise be. But you could read this as simply a variant on the classic line for progressive income taxes, that there is declining marginal utility to income.

[MOBIUS]

Originally posted by Colon™
For ****'s sake, the guy has land of plenty corruption in his location field. You think that's going to get to him?

No, but it looks like it got to you...