August 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            
Blog powered by Typepad

« Scholarship & a Free Society -- Time to Apply | Main | The 20th Anniversary of Hayek's Death »

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451eb0069e20168e9065bc1970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Economics Everywhere --- Basketball Edition:

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Godd, thanks for this article :)

Personally, I've never been much into organized sports. When I was a little kid I would miss hitting the t-ball. How does anybody miss hitting the t-ball? But I did a ton of 10ks and quite a few sprint and olympic distance triathlons. Triathlons are good fun.

My lack of interest in organized sports means that I have to put a bit of effort into following this entry. I wonder if you would have to invest the same amount of effort into following this "economics everywhere" entry of mine on plants...
http://pragmatarianism.blogspot.com/2012/03/priorities-in-peril.html

I get that incentives matter...but what about perspectives? How do they matter? When I think of perspectives I think of Buddha's parable of the blind men touching different parts of the elephant. "Perspective" ties Hayek's partial knowledge...and Bastiat's opportunity costs...and a bunch of other stuff...concerns, dreams, desires, wants, fears, tastes, preferences, etc...all together.

If perspectives did not matter...then one use of a limited resource would be as good as any. Obviously perspectives do matter though because we intuitively understand that there are better uses of our limited time/money. "Efficiency"... with regards to how resources are distributed...only has meaning in terms of our perspectives.

If you hire a personal shopper...they'll probably get some things "right"...but there will always be a disparity between what they purchased for you and what you would have purchased for yourself. Why is it a bad thing that there is a disparity? What is the benefit of allowing our perspectives to matter?

On one hand...it feels like I'm over analyzing the obvious. But on the other hand...it doesn't seem like it's really that obvious...given that economists don't say anything about 538 personal shoppers buying all the public goods for 150 million taxpayers. What's the value of 150 million unique perspectives?

If you get a chance...you should take a look at the comments that I posted over on Gene Callahan's entry on "Social Cycles"...
http://thinkmarkets.wordpress.com/2012/03/21/notes-on-a-general-theory-of-the-social-cycle/

For some reason he didn't think that my comments were relevant to his post. I really don't intentionally mean to be "bothersome"...but from my perspective...it's well worth it to encourage others to consider the economic value of incorporating 150 million taxpayer's perspectives into the distribution of public funds.

As I mentioned on Callahan's post...I really don't think we would have depressions or recessions if, all things being equal, we applied market principles to the public sector. So either I'm wrong...or discussing business cycles is a moot point.

Well...tried to work out the perspective concept a bit... http://pragmatarianism.blogspot.com/2012/03/perspectives-matter-economics-in-one.html

...and then tied it into the conceptual foundation for a Magna Carta Movement... http://pragmatarianism.blogspot.com/2012/03/magna-carta-movement.html

yup yup

The comments to this entry are closed.