If the cost/benefit analysis had some objective basis, it would have more credibility (ignoring questions about what should/should not be included, it might have some basis. It could be compared to a legal opinion. A good lawyer can argue either side. Is it an act of irrational stubbornness to resist a lawyer's brief?
In short, cost/benefit is not scientific at all. -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu michaelperelman.wordpress.com _______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
