My confusion, I guess, is which practice Ramsey is saying is "ethically
indefensible."  Is "not discounting" ethically indefensible?  Or is it
discounting which is "ethically indefensible"?  I should have paid more
attention the year they were teaching diagramming sentences.  I didn't, so I'm
still confused.

Gene Coyle

"J. Barkley Rosser, Jr." wrote:

> Eugene,
>      To "not discount" means to treat the "future enjoyments"
> as equal in value to present ones.  That means using a
> zero discount rate.
>      There are a lot of people in environmental and ecological
> economics who argue for this, along with a lot of others,
> including some from the Marxian tradition.  There are a lot
> of issues floating around with this.
>      Ramsey influenced Pigou who in 1932 complained
> about the "defective telescopic faculty" that people use when
> contemplating the future (and discounting, that is, devaluing it).
> Barkley Rosser
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eugene Coyle <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thursday, March 01, 2001 2:48 PM
> Subject: [PEN-L:8568] Re: Re: [Fwd: Re: query: Frank Ramsey]
>
> >As I read the quoted sentence I take it to mean discount rates should be
> higher
> >than, not zero.
> >
> >Clarify?
> >
> >Gene Coyle
> >
> >"J. Barkley Rosser, Jr." wrote:
> >
> >> michael,
> >>         "It is assumed that we do not discount later enjoyments
> >> in comparison with earlier ones, a practice which is ethically
> >> indefensible and arises merely from the weakness of the
> >> imagination."
> >> Frank P. Ramsey, "A Mathematical Theory of Saving," Economic
> >> Journal, 1928, vol. 38, no. 152, pp. 543-559, quote appearing
> >> on the first page.
> >>       Essay also reprinted in D.H. Mellor, ed., _Foundations: Essays
> >> in Philosophy, Logic, Mathematics and Economics_, 1978,
> >> Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press, pp. 261-281, where it
> >> appears on p. 261.
> >> Barkley Rosser
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: michael perelman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> Date: Thursday, March 01, 2001 1:01 AM
> >> Subject: [Fwd: [PEN-L:8500] Re: query: Frank Ramsey]
> >>
> >> >>        He is also famous for arguing on ethical grounds
> >> >> that discount rates should be zero.
> >> >
> >> >I don't recall that in the 1928 article.  Where did he say that?
> >> >
> >> >"J. Barkley Rosser, Jr." wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>       Frank Ramsey was a mathematical growth
> >> >> theorist and philosopher at Cambridge who died
> >> >> in his 20s in the 1920s.  He was the first to posit
> >> >> a growth theory model with an infinite time horizon,
> >> >> I believe.  His "Mathematical Theory of Saving" is
> >> >> very influential in growth theory.
> >> >
> >> >>        Offhand, I am not sure what a "Ramseyite" approach
> >> >> would be, but I suggest that it involves infinite horizon
> >> >> optimal growth models.   Ramsey was very influential]
> >> >> on Keynes and even people like Wittgenstein, but that
> >> >> side of him does not appear in his most famous paper
> >> >> (I think it appeared in the Economic Journal).
> >> >> Barkley Rosser
> >> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> >> From: Jim Devine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> >> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >> >> Date: Tuesday, February 27, 2001 12:17 PM
> >> >> Subject: [PEN-L:8480] query: Frank Ramsey
> >> >>
> >> >> >Yesterday, I received an e-mail advertising a macroeconomics textbook
> >> that
> >> >> >was based on the ideas of Frank Ramsey. It wasn't Keynesian or
> >> monetarist,
> >> >> >but Ramseyite (to paraphrase the blurb). Does anyone know anything
> about
> >> >> >Ramsey and his ideas? It sounds like he totally ignored the factor of
> >> >> >uncertainty in making decisions about the future, but I don't know
> >> anything
> >> >> >about him.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECTED] &  http://bellarmine.lmu.edu/~jdevine
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >
> >> >--
> >> >
> >> >Michael Perelman
> >> >Economics Department
> >> >California State University
> >> >Chico, CA 95929
> >> >
> >> >Tel. 530-898-5321
> >> >E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >
> >

Reply via email to