Hello!
The comments on this profile are unclaimed and thus are unverified.
Do they belong to you? Claim these comments.
Matt
Is this you? Claim Profile »
4 months ago
in Magic Buttons: The Breakdown on Will Wilkinson
I have two words for anyone who voted against 1% growth: scope insensitivity.
9 months ago
in Coasean Morality on Will Wilkinson
I just read the article. The key point: in a world a zero transaction costs, information costs nothing to acquire, so there are no information costs, so you can know every single fact instantaneously.
The point that ultimately means his argument fails: with zero transaction costs, it costs nothing to ignore the pain of others.
Read the whole thing to understand why. It's a simple read and amenable to skimming
The point that ultimately means his argument fails: with zero transaction costs, it costs nothing to ignore the pain of others.
Read the whole thing to understand why. It's a simple read and amenable to skimming
1 year ago
in Liberaltarianism: Back the Future on Will Wilkinson
For more on the division of labor vs. comparative advantage:
http://distributedrepublic.net/archives/2008/06...
http://distributedrepublic.net/archives/2008/06...
1 year ago
in Liberaltarianism: Back the Future on Will Wilkinson
To add, I'm pretty sure the 3 conditions are sufficient, not necessary conditions for comparative advantage to operate.
1 year ago
in Liberaltarianism: Back the Future on Will Wilkinson
@murigeo
"Ricardo has 3 requirements for comparative advantage to be successful.
1) No flow of capital across borders
2) Full employment and freedom of labor to move from job to job
3)Trade is equal.
None of these requirements is met by our current trade policies. I would argue that I am more “Ricardian” in principle then those claiming our current policies fit the bill. "
You have the same blindspot on trade as the typically archlibertarian Austrians: the division of labor. Arguable it is more important than comparative advantage when it comes trade. See the first 3 (short) chapters of Smith's Wealth of Nations, available here: http://www.econlib.org/library/Smith/smWN.html
"And again, I always resort to my claim that no unplanned society has ever existed… "
In what sense is any western society "planned?"
"Ricardo has 3 requirements for comparative advantage to be successful.
1) No flow of capital across borders
2) Full employment and freedom of labor to move from job to job
3)Trade is equal.
None of these requirements is met by our current trade policies. I would argue that I am more “Ricardian” in principle then those claiming our current policies fit the bill. "
You have the same blindspot on trade as the typically archlibertarian Austrians: the division of labor. Arguable it is more important than comparative advantage when it comes trade. See the first 3 (short) chapters of Smith's Wealth of Nations, available here: http://www.econlib.org/library/Smith/smWN.html
"And again, I always resort to my claim that no unplanned society has ever existed… "
In what sense is any western society "planned?"
1 year ago
in The Sound You Hear Is Your Paradigm Shifting on Will Wilkinson
Torgo: but legal borders DO matter for economics since institutions matter. Consider the border of The US and Mexico.
1 year ago
in Meditations on Collective Action and Moral Norms on Will Wilkinson
"Indeed, I think the fact that we do successfully solve so many of them basically refutes strict rational choice assumptions."
Aren't rational choice assumptions perfectly consistent with these solutions given preferences for being moral?
Aren't rational choice assumptions perfectly consistent with these solutions given preferences for being moral?
2 years ago
in Metaphysics is Boring When You Know the Answers on Will Wilkinson
Care to explain what you mean by "understanding the relevant sense of 'possible?'" What sense is relevant, outside of within the law of causation?
