[beavus]

You then asked why the laws of economics mutate. They don't mutate. They don't do anything at all--which WAS his point. You surely understand the difference between staying the same and mutating--regardless of what mutating economics are.

[DumpsterDiver]

You then asked why the laws of economics mutate. They don't mutate. They don't do anything at all--which WAS his point.

BigAzzHam:

The level of economic ignorance in this country is truly astounding. Take government schools - if the government was capable of running a school system than it should be able to run grocery stores.

(1) Ask people if they think the government should grocery stores and they will say no.

(2) Ask them if the government should run public schools and they will say yes.

(3) Ask them to explain why the laws of economics mutate depending on the type of good or service that is being delivered and they will stare at you incomprehensibly.

My confusion over his post is twofold. 1) I had never heard of the laws of "mutating" economics, and 2) I don't see the logic behind sentence #3 following sentences 1 and 2.

My guess is that his point was that if people don't think that government should run grocey stores, then why would they think that government should run schools.

You surely understand the difference between staying the same and mutating

Yes, I do.

--regardless of what mutating economics are.

I was trying to find out why he even added that to the mix. Maybe he'll post later.