830
submitted 9 months ago by stabby_cicada@slrpnk.net to c/memes@slrpnk.net
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Zink@programming.dev 55 points 9 months ago

Isn’t this really just suggesting that the “services” part of goods and services doesn’t have real value?

In this case, each person paid for the entertainment of watching their friends eat shit. They only did the exact same thing for the exact same amount of money to make it seem like one negated the other.

[-] Obi@sopuli.xyz 15 points 9 months ago

They basically traded each other the entertainment of watching the other one eat shit. The money was actually entirely unnecessary.

[-] stabby_cicada@slrpnk.net 13 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

In this case, each person paid for the entertainment of watching their friends eat shit.

Not to overanalyze the joke even more, but:

Eating feces is not $100 worth of entertainment by any rational standard.

No rational person would spend $100 to watch his friend eat feces.

No rational person would accept $100 to eat feces.

No rational society allows someone to either eat feces or pay others to do so, for public health reasons if nothing else.

I mean, if you went to an unhoused person and offered him $100 to eat feces, you'd get arrested. And you'd deserve it. Because even the United States isn't quite that bad yet.

(And this is not a hypothetical. People do those kinds of things. There are unhoused people I know from Food Not Bombs who refuse food from strangers because too many of them have gotten adulterated food. And most of them have stories about people offering them money to do degrading things.)

So this $200 in GDP represents an activity that's injurious to public health, morally bankrupt, and leaves everyone participating in it worse off.

But from the Economics 101 worldview, the economists created $200 worth of entertainment, because both of them were willing to pay $100 to see each other eat shit and that means, by definition, eating shit was worth $100 in entertainment.

Which makes the punchline an even more vicious satire of capitalism and its bullshit metrics than it originally appeared.

[-] HorseRabbit@lemmy.sdf.org 8 points 9 months ago

Bro what are you doing

[-] jyte@lemmy.world 4 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Have you ever eard of "fecal microbiota transplant" ? Because that's basically eating shit.

No rational person would accept $100 to eat feces.

Well, actually, big pharma will make you pay for it, which is even better :)

[-] gandalf_der_12te@feddit.de 1 points 9 months ago

Interestingly, by "eating ass", you are actually doing 'microbiota transplant'.

Just that nobody calls it that, except big pharma, who does it to reason that they ask a lot of money for it.

[-] runeko@programming.dev 10 points 9 months ago

If, instead of eating it, one economist picked up some shit and sold it to the other. Then, the other sold it back. This would suggest the "goods" part of goods and services also doesn't have value.

[-] Evotech@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

If your are selling shit, wick let's be frank. It's like 89%

[-] dangblingus@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 9 months ago

No, it's suggesting that capitalists are coprophagists and that money has no intrinsic value.

[-] PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works 2 points 9 months ago

Add a zero and let's go.

this post was submitted on 12 Feb 2024
830 points (96.3% liked)

solarpunk memes

2874 readers
929 users here now

For when you need a laugh!

The definition of a "meme" here is intentionally pretty loose. Images, screenshots, and the like are welcome!

But, keep it lighthearted and/or within our server's ideals.

Posts and comments that are hateful, trolling, inciting, and/or overly negative will be removed at the moderators' discretion.

Please follow all slrpnk.net rules and community guidelines

Have fun!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS