Sexonomics is classically defined as the study of use of scarce sexual resources having competitive and alternative uses. Consider the Garden of Eden. Adam and Eve had - only - each other. The Garden was a linear system for the production and distribution of sex. There was no scarcity, real or perceived. Hence, there was no need for sexonomics.
Now, men always want more sex than what women are willing to offer. A free market sexonomic system enables women to increase the price - physical, emotional, monetary, intellectual or status offerings - for sex. This has resulted in outcries of "exploitation" and "control freakism". Revisiting the basic principles of economics will prove the ignorance of such hostile reactions. Floating prices not only ration supplies and optimize demand but also provide incentives for better service and alternative products. Studies show women are now more prepared to give blow jobs. Men who cannot afford women watch porn and jerk off.
Never mind liberal politicians declaring sex as a "constitutional right" and wanting to create "universal sex care" that is 14% of GDP. Let us consider for a moment the Clinton-Boxer bill to make sex "more affordable" by fixing ceiling prices. If S 18.27998 becomes law: people usually content with watching such videos stand in the line anyway, along with men who have genuine sexual needs and can afford them. With no incentives to improve or increase supply, a shortage is created at that price. Remember the energy crises in California was caused due to government stipulating energy costs. Shortages and surpluses are not necessarily real or physical. They are more often a function of prices and supply-demand dynamics.
Sexonomics like economics, is concerned more with results than intentions. Adam Smith's observation "the benefits of competitive capitalism are no part of the capitalist's intentions" should be reapplied to sexonomics.
Thalai is definitely the reincarnation of Malthus.
TTM, ivana ethi vidaadheenga. Please.
thalai is Toffler.
*bows*
//If S 18.27998 becomes law: people usually content with watching such videos stand in the line anyway, along with men who have genuine sexual needs and can afford them. With no incentives to improve or increase supply, a shortage is created at that price//
now the point is there is a problem of allocation at that price. in a market there are no lines. usually goods are sold to the highest bidder. so if the legal price is fixed at S1.223456, then there is a premium, over this price which is paid under the table (read bribes). since the total price is higher, those content watching videos will continue to watch videos, and there wont be any shortage because the real price will anyway be paid.
now a shortage is created because supply is fixed.
so lets assume there are equal number of women and men. X
now some of those women, because they are not ready to have sex, so we have X-n women and X men in the system. the number of men outnumbers the number of women. and the women, form a cartel and jack up the price of sex, and the men are ready to pay any price because they are horny, horny bastards.
now since X-N men can only have sex, N men have to watch videos.
and that is why how ever ugly looking a girl is, she can always have sex
no no, thalai is definitely malthus. That assumption of static supply when sex obviously leads to the creation of both more supply as well as demand - dead giveaway.
TTM, Kingsley & Kyle, Are this Malthus and Toffler sex workers?
Anu: I am already eri dhan iruken.
Vatsan: This is the Thamizh Nation where no one accepts or gives bribes. And they have already jacked up the price of sex.
dei murungukka!! tamilan oda contribution rendu vishyam
1) corruption and pana puzkham
2) hypocrisy, adu dhaan damil rathathula odum adu illati adhu tamil nation illai!! terinjiko
the thamizh secret service will assasinate you, just for this.
Btw, what is with the "thalai" talk? Eppolendhu ivan ellarukkum "thalai" aanan? Kadavule vandhaalum ungala ellam kaapatha mudiyadhu.
tharuthalai ku short.. thalai.
first supposition wrong. Even during th etimes of Adam and Eve, there could have been a shortage of Sex.