Robin wrote: > Races are public goods?! How do I benefit if some other people run > a race with each other? Is this just due to some externality that > healthy people produce in general?
Recall that the definition of public goods is not a good that is good for the public! :) The definition is in terms of non-rivalry and non- excludability of which non-rivalry is the more critical component. My point was simply that the output produced by someone running a race is non-rivalrous. Thus, the charitable racer can collect donations from any number of people for running the same race. Alex Alex Tabarrok Department of Economics MSN 1D3, Carow Hall George Mason University Fairfax, VA, 22030 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel. 703-993-2314 ----- Original Message ----- From: Robin Hanson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Monday, September 9, 2002 3:19 pm Subject: Re: Charity and Races as Complements > Alex Tabarrok wrote: > >I agree with John's analysis of charity and signalling. I add > only that > >a more plausible reason than the two that John gave for why people > >don't mow lawns is that lawn mowing is a private good and racing a > >public good. In other words, I can collect a donation from many > people>for racing but few people will pay me to mow my own lawn > (or anyone > >else's)!
