4 Comments
User's avatar
Dee Smith's avatar

Socialists understand their own version of economics. As socialism becomes full blown communism, those in power live like kings. Everyone else owns nothing and is unhappy.

KurtOverley's avatar

The socialist miracle will continue until Mamdani runs out of other people's money.

Michael Hermens's avatar

Well, at least they are consistent

Economics21st's avatar

Sorry for the late comment. I missed this article at the time.

"Income is a direct function of how much we can produce."

It's helpful to think of income not as a *function of* what we produce, but simply as *what we produce* itself (minus any reproductive consumption involved). You could call it "raw" income.

For example, if Alice makes a table from 3 planks, her raw income is:

+ table - 3 planks

If she then sells the table to Bob for $100, her raw income is:

+ $100 - 3 planks

Bob's raw income is:

+ table - $100

This is the only coherent approach I know for defining income, and has some extremely desirable properties, most notably linearity (the whole is the exact sum of the parts). It makes clear that production is the *only* way to generate aggregate income.

More on my substack here: https://www.economics21st.com/p/income-2