this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2023
351 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37719 readers
309 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

Only if the rides are a scarce resource. Which they aren't. Nothing that some customer could have bought is removed by jumping a turnstyle.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Nothing that some customer could have bought is removed by jumping a turnstyle.

Nothing? Not even the fuel required to transport the extra weight of somebody who hasn't paid? Not even the wages for the employees who conduct and maintain the trains?

You can argue that the amounts are miniscule, sure. But "miniscule" does not equal "zero".

[–] [email protected] 3 points 11 months ago

When you're paying, you're not buying the fuel nor are the salaries directly affected by one person is paying for riding a train.

What you're describing is called "marginal cost" and reducing this is the reason why the economics of any large scale business is actually working. You could argue with these marginal costs, but you'd be entering a completely different model/domain of economics. And no one uses this model which is abstract/non-abstract in any aspect that happens to make your point valid.