Hacker News Reader

Comment by TheLudd | Hacker News Reader

Right. That is not a paradox as stated.

The paradox would be:

  * a TV used to be really expensive. So a home just had one

  * over time TVs become half the price.

  * now a home has 3 TVs, i.e paying 150% of what they initially payed.

View on HN

It is a paradox. The paradox is that increasing the efficiency of resource usage can lead to more resource usage.

If you think that isn't a paradox because you can fairly easily explain why that is the case, you need to go and check what "paradox" means.

You said:

> No, we pay less for it. But there's much higher demand so overall use goes up.

This is economics 101, not a paradox.

To clarify how I read you: "If the price goes down, more people will want to buy, hence more units are sold"

The paradox is that _one_ person, or entity, pays more as the price goes down.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com