David,
It is too bad that you are not an anarchist. But I think you will be.
I read your posts, over the past years, as sort of a cry for help, as in "Stop
me before I sin again." So there is hope.
Gene
On Jun 4, 2012, at 1:16 PM, David Shemano wrote:
> On behalf of all market fundamentalists –
>
> I view a price, which is the product of an exchange, as information. Nothing
> more and nothing less. I don’t view information as good or bad, such as a
> “just price.” It is simply information.
>
> Some people do not like the information, just like some people do not like
> what a scale tells them when they stand on it. The dislike of specific
> information is subjective. Normally, this is no big deal. If a buyer
> subjectively views the appropriate price for an apple as 25 cents, and the
> seller subjectively views the appropriate price at 50 cents, they each go on
> their way without a second thought. At this point, we are in the realm of
> economic and/or moral reasoning, and I have nothing insightful to say whether
> buyer should or should not be offended that seller will not sell the apple at
> 25 cents.
>
> The issue moves from the economic/moral to the political when the discussion
> moves from whether one “should” disregard a price to one “must” disregard a
> price, or whether A and B should not be permitted to engage in exchange
> regardless of a mutually satisfactory price. To reach such conclusion, we
> necessarily must conclude that C’s view of the proposed transaction between A
> and B is so important that it should be imposed by force of law/gun. For you
> to convince me, a market fundamentalist, that C should be permitted to impose
> value on A and B, you must convince me that C knows more than A and B about
> the exchange from the perspective of A and B. For example, you must
> convince me that Mayor Bloomberg knows better than the consumer of soft
> drinks what is in the subjective best interests of the consumer from the
> subjective perspective of the consumer. I insist on the subjective standard,
> that Mayor Bloomberg knows me better than I know myself, which is indeed a
> very high burden, as opposed to whether Mayor Bloomberg claims to know what a
> fully informed A and B would do if they were hyper-rational. I assert that
> position because I a priori reject the notion that there is some “objective”
> view of what a person should do and I especially reject the probability that
> a third person who gets themselves in a position of power and ability to use
> force will be in a better position than me to know my best interest. I am a
> radical subjectivist, and all that entails.
>
> While it should not be necessary, I will conclude with the proviso that I am
> not an anarchist, I am in favor of rules, there are hard cases,
> externalities, transaction cost problems, etc.
>
> David Shemano
>
> From: [email protected]
> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected]
> Sent: Monday, June 04, 2012 5:07 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [Pen-l] What Money Can't Buy
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2012/may/27/michael-sandel-reason-values-bodies
> _______________________________________________
> pen-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
