Explaining the Liquidity of a Water Bottle, But Not the Tragedy of the Youth
The "Law of Supply and Demand" that graces the very first page of introductory economics textbooks is remarkably clear. It dictates that market prices are not fixed truths; rather, they fluidly seek an equilibrium at any given moment based on market conditions, the nature of the goods, and the presence of information.
Economists get incredibly excited when explaining this theory. Looking at how the exact same bottle of water costs 500 won at a local grocery store but is sold for 3,000 won inside a thirsty airplane or an amusement park, they nod their heads as if it is the most natural thing in the world. They claim: "Since the conditions of supply and demand and the circumstances of each market differ, fluidly changing prices represent a perfectly rational market equilibrium."
Why is it, then, that those who know this fluid market principle so well completely forget this magnificent grand premise when faced with bleak social realities like ultra-low birth rates or the breakdown of the family? Why do those who preached "circumstantial liquidity" in general markets turn around and stubbornly insist that the tragedy of the youth is an "eternally unchangeable rational order attained by humanity"? Behind their clear-cut theories hides an intensely cowardly double standard.
Fluid Equilibrium When Advantageous, a Law of Nature When Unfavorable
If economics wanted to be honest with its own grand premise of supply and demand, it should have explained the current low birth rate crisis in a completely different manner:
"The current phenomenon where young people do not have children—a sharp plunge in supply and demand—is a temporary state of disequilibrium caused by harsh and distorted ‘market conditions’ such as housing insecurity, job instability, and the burden of solo parenting. Therefore, if we overhaul and normalize this brutal environment, the baseline of rationality and the equilibrium point of supply and demand can easily change once again." This is the only legitimate explanation that actually aligns with the market principles they preach.
Yet, economists never say this. The moment they blame the environment and acknowledge structural contradictions, they would be confessing to the failure of the capitalist system they so fiercely worship. Thus, while they praise market liquidity in general commerce, they shut their mouths tightly when faced with social tragedies that expose the raw underbelly of capitalism, declaring: "This is simply the result of an eternal rational choice made by young people tapping on their calculators for the quality of their own lives." It is a profound hypocrisy that denies their own foundational theory just to conceal the cruelty of the system.
An "Arbitrary Hand" That Selects Only Convenient Variables
The reason why the price of the identical good varies by market condition is that the "unique context and conditions" faced by each market are different. If that is the case, when dealing with realms intertwined with family, childbirth, and human emotion, the correct order of business should be to deeply analyze the unique context of that realm—such as psychology, culture, and the collapse of community—before blindly imposing economic formulas.
However, economics lacks the capacity to do this in the first place. The only tool they possess is a single, shallow lens called "monetary amounts and selfish utility."
Out of countless complex variables in reality, they arbitrarily cherry-pick a few variables that are convenient for their equations—such as private education costs or opportunity costs—and fit them post-hoc, boasting, "Look, doesn’t my equation match perfectly?" Consequently, they fail to explain even their own grand premise that equilibrium fluidly shifts according to market conditions, committing the contradiction of mechanically fossilizing human life.
A Vested Ideology Masquerading as Science
The real reason economics deliberately refuses to explain this obvious contradiction is that it functions not as a pure science, but as an excellent "ideology" designed to legitimize the order of the vested interests.
If economics honestly declared, "The current low birth rate is an abnormal state of disequilibrium caused by the deterioration of social infrastructure, and changing the structure will alter the baseline of rationality," the state and corporations would immediately have to spend massive amounts of capital and overturn the current system to stabilize the lives of the youth.
Instead, economics provides the sweetest excuse tailored exactly to the tastes of the powerful who wish to evade that responsibility. It tells them: "Regardless of market conditions, young people independently calculated and made a ‘rational choice’ not to have children, so there is no need to overhaul the system."
Conclusion: Reject the Opportunistic Rules
It is not that economics cannot explain this contradiction; it is that they do not want to. Speaking of the liquidity of supply and demand in general markets to appear flexible, while transforming capitalist tragedies into "human rational choice" to grant absolution to the system, is a deeply deceitful attitude.
We must never surrender the leadership of our lives to an opportunistic discipline that distorts its own rules to suit the appetite of the powerful. How can they argue that the price of a water bottle is fluid, yet claim the birth rate of the youth is a fixed rationality? Shattering this shameless calculator of double standards and altering the harsh market conditions themselves is the only way to rectify the collapsed order of civilization.
Leave a Reply