that was actually pretty funny <| sep |> Inside or outside ? <| sep |> 90 % of the time I go to the movies I ' m pissed off by the end . There is always some jackass talking in the vicinity of me hearing them . <| sep |> Even less than that <| sep |> Selfie sticks . Stop . Please . <| sep |> the point is that once they close their short , they aren ' t then longing ETH . so , the dips are ferocious , and the postdump bump is merely to close the short with no buyin . There aren ' t enough people going long ETH for the sake of being long ETH . <| sep |> That ' s fine if you don ' t have any data . I ' ve just heard that claim a lot and have learned recently that Adam Smith was not a proponent of that type of Laissezfaire type capitalism , but he ' s where this of market driven generating a welfare for the nation actually comes from . It also it looks like the invisible hand was taken out of context , but either way after just learning that tidbit I thought about it for a sec and if an argument depends on some unexplained syllogism for its conclusion it ' s probably a bad argument . The other premises do make sense , of course . Two people involved in trade most definitely will do what they can to benefit themselves . And if everyone does this it does seem like we ' d be better off , but that part is never really talked about well . There ' s a lot of hand waving pun intended and we ' re just supposed to accept that it works , but precapitalist ' s like Smith were concerned about exploitation and dumbing down of the workers . Basically , the idea that you presented is great . I have no problem with it , but I have a problem with how we get to the conclusion because Smith and others would postulate under the idea of all else being equal , which is basically just saying if exploitation doesn ' t exist , we have a very well educated populace , and people are mostly operating honestly like have a correct or reasonable calculation of the value of labor then everyone will prosper . Smith , especially , understood that public works were actually pretty good for the welfare of the society . I forgot what he labeled out himself , but I ' m pretty sure that infrastructure and education were most definitely among them . So I ' m not trying to beat you up or anything . Just trying to talk to more people about this because for the passed week or so it has irked me . Especially because in high school we ' re usually taught that Smith is a laissezfaire proponent when he ' s not , which makes so much damn since given that he ' s Scottish and that ' s a French term .