And this is all territory I don’t feel comfortable covering, to be quite honest, mainly because I came equipped with different parts. Granted, guys have certain similar issues, but typically not as severe, and we have a much greater tendency to ignore the stereotypical ideals anyway.

Either way, none of us up here even knew what was going on, but we decided that whatever it was, it looked political. I asked around some more and found out it was NDoP. Of course, I told my coworkers, all three of them on the floor that day, that it was indeed a political event. I didn’t feel the need to elaborate.

But not all demand is manufactured, and this entry is not about general case.

Do you think demand for hypersexualized children is manufactured?

For that matter, “hypersexualized children” is broadly an issue of cultural context. 14 yrs old has a long history of being a marriageable age.

Similarly, I believe firmly that people are deluded into thinking they need an SUV to be safe on the roads/drive in bad weather/compensate for something lacking in their lives (or on their bodies). Have you ever tried talking someone out of one? It never works once they’ve figurately bought what the auto manufacturers are selling.

b) we can certainly debate about the DOD budget and its excesses, but this wasn’t a post about money, this was a post about the government backing irrational practices. And the NCCAM is Bob’s day after day of Homeopathic Medicine being promoted by the government.

(How much do you think the government is spending on the “national day of prayer”? Do you think that Bob is wasting his time complaining about that because the DOD has spent *years* in Iraq?)

I would rather complain about the $439 billion 2007 budget for the DOD, and debate whether some of that money could be put to better use. Or perhaps the fact that despite the huge outlay, DOD actually spent $72 billion over their budget.

I believe any “rational nation” should be fiscally responsible across the board.

Point taken. (Tally one up for Bob.)

But I’m not sure I agree with Justin. There are certainly cases where sellers create demand. But there are also cases where sellers rush in to fill a market need.

I mean, do you really think people drink alcohol because of the Budweiser frog? I’m not saying they might not be deluded into drinking Budweiser instead of beer by the ads, but I am a little dubious that advertising beer does more than channel the existing demand toward a particular brand.

(Demand for alcohol didn’t go away when the legal market did.)

There’s probably a subtle distinction here: prior to cell phones, no one had one, and everyone lived just as happily as they ever did. And I suppose you could (wrongly) argue that inventing the cell phone was followed by manipulation of the masses into imagining a need that they didn’t really have. But I suspect it was more that the desire was latent because it had no solution, and once the solution emerged, so did the market to fill the need.

That’s not the same kind of thing that you imply above, Justin, that people are deluded by corporations into thinking they want a cellphone.

—————————–

On a different note - interesting to find this entry following so closely on the heels of the last.

Nice note above. I guess Emo found a loophole in his religion…