Incentives in economics are wrong, but how? • Hacker News Board

Re: Incentives in economics are wrong, but how?

#161

Post by sokoloff » Sat, Jun 12, 2021, 3:16 PM UTC

ggggtez wrote: post #147

sokoloff wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not clear that the tax code is rewarding that in a significant way. You might argue it’s failing to punish it enough for your taste, which is a fine discussion to have. When I look over the top 10 here, 9/10 are on that list from being overwhelmingly self-made and I want what 8 of those have created to exist. (I think lots of other people self-evidently want LVMH to exist, even though I don’t care either way. Sa…

So when deciding on the policies of a nation of 350 million people, you look at the top 10? That's a completely arbitrary cut off. Why not look at the top 1, and then tell me that I should extrapolate that out to say that every billionaire is bald and owns Amazon.com ? Surely you see how choosing top 10 is a completely arbitrary cut off that you invented.

Ok. Pick a different N and do the analysis to see if it differs materially in a way that supports that birth lottery matters more than within-life activity.

Re: Incentives in economics are wrong, but how?

#162

Post by ChainOfFools » Sat, Jun 12, 2021, 7:35 PM UTC

v-erne wrote: post #160

ChainOfFools wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

maybe, but I try to avoid (or at least subordinate) phasing that implies a dualist distinction between the real and the mental. even the 'merest' of mental models is also part of reality, right? such contextualization does indeed impair portability...

>> even the 'merest' of mental models is also part of reality, right? That's quite materialistic take - I think the jury is still out on whether mind is inseparable from material reality (even if we treat it only as an emergent phenomena)

(speaking for myself here) s/materialist/monist, in which everything is considered, not material as such, but rather as emergent phenomena of differentials in causality feedback cycles.

Re: Incentives in economics are wrong, but how?

#163

Post by paulddraper » Tue, Jun 15, 2021, 5:11 AM UTC

tsimionescu wrote: post #159

paulddraper wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> People have an innate right to be as educated as they want (and can handle) What year did that right begin?

By definition, innate means that there is no beginning - it's as old as humanity itself.

So ... Who violated the caveman's right?