Comment by charcircuit
16 days ago
It's not an obvious joke. It seems closer to a puzzle in that the reader must discover that the $100 was for entertainment. This is a common class of puzzle where money changes hands between two people and results in a surprising conclusion.
Bro, there’s something really wrong with your head if you seriously believe that the gist of the story is “eating shit is entertainment”.
A better gist may be the value of entertainment is temporary.
If instead it was just one person and they went to a movie theater. If you ignore the entertainment value it may just look like the person through away the admission cost.
Why else would the economist offer the other to eat shit if not for entertainment? Like what other purpose would it reasonably be?
They don’t call it the dismal science for nothing!