Re: Social and Political Aspects
dsc17@cornell.edu
Wed, 7 Jul 1999 08:45:42 -0400 (EDT)
As a budding economist and frequent critic of my discipline, I liked Bob's
thoughts on efficiency and farm loss, and the ability of producers to
externalize their costs..thus producing "cheaper" food.This is a huge problem.
I believe that much of the problem is how we economists measure things
Rarely are the true costs reflected in the price. When and if they ever are,
then "efficiency" could mean producing at the lowest cost: least resource use,
least
pollution, unemployment, whatever. (Where marginal benefit equals marginal
cost, however you wish to measur those things)
An economics professor in my dept. says that
economists are not good at telling you where to go, but once you decide where to
go, it is good at telling you the best way to get there. If true costs are
accounted for, efficiency may well be a good thing, as would be the market
forces that would drive the less eficient out of business...
What we need, in my view, is a better (more broad) way of measuring benefits and
costs. Then markets and economics CAN be a powerful tool for decision making
and maximizing the social good
Maybe I'm just defending my chosen discipline, but I think economics is a useful
way of lookin at things, and markets may be the best way to allocate resources
Any thoughts?
David
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail