[roenxi]

> If you're measuring it as "how many people own superyachts" that's probably different from how most people want to measure "how well is the planet being run".

A disturbing number of people are financially incapable to the point where they struggle with concepts like spending less money than they earn. There is a significant tension between what they want to measure and what economic optimal looks like. The economy is there to maximise peace and prosperity, the people who think otherwise should be kept well away from the levers of power.

> Why? This seems like an odd statement. Why is a singer more efficient at doing this than a team of analysts?

I assume she's got a team of analysts working on it. I doubt she manages her own money directly. They're probably pretty good.

> You think that

> 1. We should be pushing for more superyachts, as an immediate measure of efficient allocation of resources

I think that a world where one person has a superyacht is better than a world where nobody does. In much the same way that a world in the 60s someone probably owned a really expensive mainframe and there'd be people moaning about how outrageous it was that someone could spend so much money on a big calculator. The market doesn't seem to want to give everyone a superyacht, and I doubt it would be efficient to jump right in to it. For obvious reasons

Points 2 to 4 though seem like an accurate restatement. With the caveat that my knowledge of Swift is patchy and distant.