On 12/9/2004, Wei Dai wrote:
While not disagreeing with that, I suggest another reason may be that if
we didn't have to spend money on positional goods, the most productive
among us might choose to work 1/2 or even 1/10 the number of hours we do
currently. A majority of voters would lose because of
Ron Baty wrote (Dec.02):
> Given that there is little intrinsic value to being tall, but
> rather it is to being taller than others, would not the wide
> spread use of genetics to enhance height decrease the value of
> being tall.
It reduces the positional value of a given height, obviously, but t
The information about the other positional-goods related policy (limiting
the number of hours in a work week. In other words, forced spending on
leisure) actually provides more reasons for ending regulations that limit
the number of hours in a work week and all regulations that interfere in
that re
I thought of one more positional-goods related policy: limiting the number
of hours in a work week. In other words, forced spending on leisure,
which as this survey indicates is non-positional:
Do You Enjoy Having More Than Others? Survey Evidence of Positional Goods
http://www.handels.gu.se/epc/a
Ron Baty writes:
> Given that there is little intrinsic value to being tall, but rather it is
> to being taller than others, would not the wide spread use of genetics to
> enhance height decrease the value of being tall.
Are you sure about that? When I'm trying to reach the high shelf, I
want to
, 2004 6:54 PM
Subject: [armchair] Re: Regulating Positional Goods
On Sun, Nov 28, 2004 at 02:24:18PM -0500, rex wrote:
> Wouldn't it make more sense to tax or "punish" the people who don't
> enhance
> their kids to be taller or better?
Part of the advantage of being taller i
On Sun, Nov 28, 2004 at 02:24:18PM -0500, rex wrote:
> Wouldn't it make more sense to tax or "punish" the people who don't enhance
> their kids to be taller or better?
Part of the advantage of being taller is social. Because making your kids
taller confers a social advantage on them while simultan
more than the counter argument. Though,
being a libertarian I actually do not advocate either and instead advocate
that the government/taxation be kept out of the matter(s).
- Original Message -
From: "Wei Dai" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday,
On Sun, Nov 21, 2004 at 07:27:32AM -0500, Robin Hanson wrote:
> I was at a workshop this weekend where we discussed the possibility of
> regulating human genetic enhancements, and it was suggested that positional
> goods were a valid reason for regulation. It might make sense, for
> example, to ta
I was at a workshop this weekend where we discussed the possibility of
regulating human genetic enhancements, and it was suggested that positional
goods were a valid reason for regulation. It might make sense, for
example, to tax the act of enhancing your kids to be taller than other
folks' kids.
10 matches
Mail list logo
