"Robson, Alex" wrote:
> I think a better reason to be "hard-hearted" is that the "Principle of Equity fails
>to recognize differences in individual preferences and valuations, rather than
>differences in merit (i.e. differences in the moral character of an action).
Blinder would reply that it's the Principle of Efficiency that handles
differences in preferences, etc. So you're basically just dumping
Equity and making Efficiency everything.
> Of course, if your "merit" ranking is the same as your preference ranking, then
>there's no problem - but this will rarely be the case.
There are strong reasons to expect a general correlation. True, my
preferences for pastries have nothing to do with merit. But pretty much
all forms of production rely on ability (especially cognitive ability)
and effort. The most meritorious doughnut producers deliver better
products at a lower cost, though that won't help them if the public
doesn't like waffles.
In that case, I should add, another form of merit is relevant - having
the ability and taking the effort to correctly forecast demand.
> If I did hate doughnuts, but I thought that "able and hard-working people deserve
>more", should I buy the doughnut? No: it would be inefficient for me to do so. So
>there is no necessary connection between efficiency and merit.
It's not automatic, but there are some strong reasons for correlation.
If they were always identical, of course, there would be no reason to
advance multiple principles.
> As Hayek states on page 96 of The Constitution of Liberty:
>
> "We do not wish people to earn a maximum of merit but to achieve a maximum of
>usefulness at a minimum of pain and sacrifice and therefore a minimum of merit."
Why maximizing output given inputs is not meritorious baffles me.
> and on page 97:
>
> "A society in which the position of the individuals was made to correspond to human
>ideas of moral merit would be the exact opposite of a free society"
"Made to" correspond to merit? Yes, that's the exact opposite of a free
society by definition. *Led to* correspond to merit by the invisible
hand? No problem at all.
> Alex Robson
> ANU
--
Prof. Bryan Caplan
Department of Economics George Mason University
http://www.bcaplan.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mr. Banks: Will you be good enough to explain all this?!
Mary Poppins: First of all I would like to make one thing
perfectly clear.
Banks: Yes?
Poppins: I never explain *anything*.
*Mary Poppins*
