What was a failure around the meaning of Aesthetics and the Arts in society,
has now reached into pure scientific research.   

 

Might there not be something here that is deeper than the market and its
mechanisms?   

 

Might the market be embedded in a greater reality that requires advanced
thinking about systems larger than economics and the market?

 

America’s answer for such things is to put her head in the sand and create a
“Not for profit” sector to take up the slack.

 

But does it work?

 

Does the complexities of expertise required by these professions far outrun
the sincere ambition of talented people in that profession making the
profession itself fail and spreading its shards around the rest of the
society skewing the basis of society itself?

 

REH

 

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Arthur Cordell
Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2011 9:09 PM
To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION';
[email protected]
Subject: Re: [Futurework] Professional Ethics (of economists)

 

Is this the sort of market failure you are thinking about?

 

 

 

http://opus1journal.org/articles/article.asp?docID=140

 

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-6435.1966.tb02491.x/abstra
ct

 

 

THE TYRANNY OF SMALL DECISIONS: MARKET FAILURES, IMPERFECTIONS, AND THE
LIMITS OF ECONOMICS
<http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1467-6435.1966.tb02491.x/abstr
act#fn1> †

By Alfred E. Kahn

 

A market economy makes its large allocations and reallocation of resources
on the basis of a summing up of the ‘votes’ recorded by customers in a host
of small, individual market transactions. A critical task in appraising the
efficiency of such an economy, then, is to determine whether and under what
conditions this adding up process produces optimal results. The ‘smallness’
of the decisive, individual transactions—their limited size, scope and
time-perspective—can, it is argued, be a source of misallocations, in the
sense that consumers might disapprove of the larger result thereby produced,
if they were ever given the opportunity explicitly to vote for or against
it.

In certain circumstances, the smallness of the relevant decisions may
produce authentic market failure. This will be the case where they do not
include an independent appraisal of customers’ desire to keep available for
possible future use a service that they do not actually use in sufficient
amount to cover the costs of providing it. In other circumstances, the
smallness of the individual transactions may encourage irrational consumer
choice, because they are too small to justify the effort of securing good
market information. In yet others, monopoly elements may cause the buyer to
be presented with excessively narrow choices that do not correctly reflect
that actual costs of the competing alternatives; and the result may be an
uneconomic spiral of product quality changes over time so-called ‘product
inflation’. Finally, the cumulation of individual choices may have the
ultimate effect of changing consumer preference function themselves, in
which event it is not possible for welfare economics to judge the optimality
of market performance. These possible defects of the market may be conceived
in the more familiar terms—as attributable to externalities, market
imperfections or the defects of consumer sovereignty itself. Emphasis on the
contribution influence of the smallness of the controlling decisions has the
virtue of suggesting the possible necessity of substituting a ‘large’ for a
piecemeal accumulation of small decisions if the results are to be
intelligently appraised or improved.

 

 

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Sandwichman
Sent: Saturday, September 24, 2011 4:03 PM
To: [email protected]; RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION
Subject: Re: [Futurework] Professional Ethics (of economists)

 

 

On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 11:56 AM, Mike Spencer <[email protected]>
wrote:


Sandwichman wrote:

> Try "incidental uncharged disservices"...

That works, tnx.


> "Gaming the system" is a non-technical (but also non-specific) term for
> what I'm talking about.

Would you care to expand on that just a tad?  I don't know a technical
term for "Gaming the system".


Yes, I would like to expand on that but it'll be more than a tad. I'm
researching/writing something fairly comprehensive 'as we speak'. The issue,
as I see it has to do with what is commonly referred to as "market failure"
and the moral hazard that can result from attempts to correct such
inefficiencies and inequities through government intervention. Or put it
this way, the invisible hand of the market doesn't necessarily lead to an
beneficent result but attempts by the state to fix the problems are not
fool-proof (or, more to the point, game-proof) either.

snip, snip, snip

 

_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework

Reply via email to