Embed Notice

@undefined @toiletpaper @scottsantens @Shamar > you are just showing that you know nothing about art (or its history).

You said I know nothing about art or its history and then said absolutely nothing that contradicted what I said… In fact you agreed perfectly with what I said.

The ability of the market to pay for value is well shown in the cases of van Gogh, Meucci, Olivetti and so on…

Yes those are all examples of artists who made far more after their life. Which I already said occurs… you literally just insult me, say i wrong, then just went on to say how i was wrong and didnt actually disagree with a word I said…

The market is not rational.

Never said it was, or that it needs to be. The market is based on utility, but you clearly do not understand what utility means, it doesnt mean something is rational. It means it serves a purpose to someone, and bringing enjoyment is a valid purpose and would be an example of utility.

@toiletpaper @scottsantens