Adele_L comments on Q for GiveWell: What is GiveDirectly's mechanism of action? - Less Wrong

16 Post author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 31 July 2013 08:02PM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (29)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: Adele_L 31 July 2013 11:20:18PM 2 points [-]

Yes, but that string of trades is increased velocity, which is a very significant effect on economies that you wouldn't get to the same extent if you just gave the final person what they want.

Comment author: DanielLC 01 August 2013 01:02:54AM 2 points [-]

Is it a bad effect?

Each trade is beneficial, or it wouldn't happen.

Comment author: [deleted] 01 August 2013 01:52:42AM *  7 points [-]

Each trade is apparently beneficial, to irrational actors, with potentially large power/exploitability differences (eg lottery tickets are "beneficial"), and values that differ from what you might care about (eg Pedophile rings have some "beneficial" trades involved).

That, said, it's probably actually beneficial overall. Just that the simple proof doesn't get you there.

Comment author: pragmatist 01 August 2013 02:01:50AM 5 points [-]

Each trade is beneficial, or it wouldn't happen.

Each trade may be beneficial to the parties involved (although even this isn't necessarily true for the ordinary sense of the word "beneficial"), but it need not be beneficial to the economy as a whole. Trades can have negative externalities.

Comment author: DanielLC 01 August 2013 04:04:43AM 3 points [-]

They can, but it's not the sort of thing that you assume when you don't have proof otherwise.