An Odd Problem that Proves the Obvious
In reaction to the global recession, the DeBeers diamond cartel has reduced rough diamond prices by up to 20%; "...industry sources in South Africa are now estimating that diamond prices could fall another "59-63 percent." (Unwarranted precision, perhaps?)
At the heart of this concern is the reality that, except for those few stones that have been permanently lost, every diamond that has been found and cut into a gem since the beginning of time still exists today. This enormous inventory, which overhangs the market, is literally in - or on - the public's hands. Some hundred million women wear diamonds, while millions of other people keep them in safe deposit boxes as family heirlooms.In the entire history of economic exchange, that problem has to be unique.
However, given just a bit of thought, pretty darn obvious. And with just twice that much thought, which still does not amount to very much, the moment this notion becomes widespread, diamond prices could crash through that 63% floor like a safe dropped from a vaulted ceiling.
Those safe deposit boxes are holding those diamonds for two reasons: sentimental and monetary. However, once prices start to slide, and the reason for that slide becomes obvious, people are going to get a sudden grasp of the "last fool" problem, and that diamond overhang could hit the market like a tidal wave.
Very bad news, indeed, for jewelers, and DeBeers. Their only hope is aspiration marketing in China and India. Success there could forestall the inevitable for another generation or two.
Good news though, for Africa, where diamonds have been the fuel for many a savage tribal war.
The marketing agency that cooked up this "diamonds are forever" thing was completely aware of the ultimate overhang: "Diamonds do not wear out and are not consumed. New diamonds add to the existing supply in trade channels and in the possession of the public. In our opinion old diamonds are in 'safe hands' only when widely dispersed and held by individuals as cherished possessions valued far above their market price."
In other words, individuals translates into "women", who can be persuaded to form an emotional attachment to a glittery crystal. In part, the validation for the attachment derives from its cost -- we are emotionally blackmailed into tolerating the DeBeers cartel -- and that attachment will, in turn, act to more-or-less permanently remove the stone from the market.
Now, imagine that same marketing campaign aimed at men. Can't do it, can you?
No matter the exhortations of NOW et al, the very existence, and success, of this marketing campaign proves, to the point of making all future "studies" redundant, that girl brains are inherently different from boy brains. The notions that women are narrow shouldered men, or that people are interchangeable units suffering from gender construct issues, bring the term "empty" to a whole new level of nothingness.
This is coated in irony.
Those who most reject evolution would explain this as a completely unsurprising matter of fact: it is true on account of God made it that way.
In contrast, the Left can manage intellectual coherence only by convincing themselves that evolution stopped at the neck.
So, on the one hand, the reasoning is fatuous, but the conclusion sound; on the other, the reasoning sound, but the conclusion fatuous. Probably as good a means as any to restore meaning to the political terms "Right" and "Left".
Regardless, it is probably a wise idea to beat the rush and sell those diamonds now.