= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
CellBioGuy comments on Stupid questions thread, October 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (223)
That line of reasoning falls somewhere between the worst elements of Reaganomics and Keynesian economics. It's wishful thinking about something somebody already supports.
It seems reasonable to me that the marginal spending of money given to those of low incomes will be higher than the marginal spending of money given to those of high incomes.
And if we mandated by law that all durable products be slightly less durable than they are now, more people would be employed replacing or repairing the damaged old ones, and demand for labor would rise, and wages would rise, and we could make products even less durable. There's no limit to the prosperity we could achieve.
That value you're trying to maximize? You might want to consider what it's measuring, before you try to maximize it.