Comments by "Persona" (@ArawnOfAnnwn) on "The Economist Who (Wrongly) Thought Gay People Made Cities Richer" video.

  1. This entire videos' thesis can be encapsulated in one word - AGGLOMERATION. Basically cities are richer cos they concentrate everything in one place - labour, infrastructure, supplier networks, financing, liaising with the govt., etc. Yeah no shit that'd make a place more productive. About the only thing cities don't have versus villages or the countryside is huge tracts of land. Pretty much everything else is pooled into them.
    5
  2. That's actually true, surprisingly enough. The reason is cos the well known 'best seller' lists, like that of the New York Times, create TONS of categories for their 'best sellers'. That way there can be a lot of best sellers, each in their own little category. But some of those books may have sold tens of millions, but others just in the hundreds of thousands, but they're both best sellers of each type.
    4
  3. Somewhat relatedly, you may or may not be surprised to learn that Guinness World Records has for years now been in the business of selling world records. They provide consultancy and advice to help clients find and perform records to get in the book, for a fee.
    4
  4.  @junglelane  It's not the authors' fault, it's this channel. The author was focused on what he called the 'creative classes', of which gay people were only a small part likely due to certain stereotypes (probably of the gay fashion designer and the like), but hardly the main point. This channel chose to zero in on that cos it sounds ridiculous and hence makes for good clickbait. When they used the term 'bohemians' in the video, that might've been a better word for the title.
    2
  5. Don't pay much attention to the gay part. The video chose to blow up a tiny element of the authors' overall idea, for the sake of clickbait. He actually spoke of the 'creative classes', of which gay folks were a part partly thanks to some stereotypes around them. The term 'bohemians', which the video itself uses later on, better describes what the author was talking about.
    1
  6. Also people shouldn't pay much attention to the gay part. This video chose to blow up a tiny element of the authors' overall idea, for the sake of clickbait. He actually spoke of the 'creative classes', of which gay folks were a part partly thanks to some stereotypes around them. The term 'bohemians', which the video itself uses later on, better describes what the author was talking about.
    1