Dear Raphael!
You wrote:
> There seems to be a difference in how the sums are occuring. This
> welfare function applies a negative utility to people having wealth
> that is not average.
If you refer to the Gini social welfare function, this is not true!
Increasing any individual welfare always i
Dear Stephen!
You wrote:
> Can we confirm that "welfare" is a synonym for
> "utility"?
As far as it is just a name, sure. However, on the group (society)
level, the term "utility" seems to be used most often for the *sum* of
the individual utilities, that is, for a *specific* social welfare funct
Stephen Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Nice to see a discussion of welfare in this context.
>Can we confirm that "welfare" is a synonym for
>"utility"?
There seems to be a difference in how the sums are occuring. This welfare
function applies a negative utility to people having wealth that
Nice to see a discussion of welfare in this context.
Can we confirm that "welfare" is a synonym for
"utility"?
A starting model would be: given a voting system which
is sufficiently expressive (perhaps a range system),
assume that everyone just votes their welfare
directly, and see where that gets
At 09:38 PM 5/15/2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Though, the tricky thing I've always run into when trying to formulate a
>better social utility measure is that when trying to make sure no one is
>left too far behind, do we unfairly reward people who complain too much?
And if we don't, then we lea
Ooo, I like it. Now I want to re-run all my old simulations that just
measured average happiness.
Though, the tricky thing I've always run into when trying to formulate a
better social utility measure is that when trying to make sure no one is
left too far behind, do we unfairly reward people w
I like this idea. It would go well with "published welfare estimates"
analogous to the "published orderings" that we have discussed recently.
Forest
<>
election-methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
tzig
>>Sent: Sunday, May 14, 2006 5:47 PM
>>To: Election Methods Mailing List
>>Subject: [EM] using welfare functions in election methods
>>
>>Hello folks!
>>
>>This is about an idea I was thinking about for several weeks now: How
>>the concept of "
t
> Subject: [EM] using welfare functions in election methods
>
> Hello folks!
>
> This is about an idea I was thinking about for several weeks now: How
> the concept of "welfare function" which is frequently used in welfare
> economics could fruitfully be used in the
Hello folks!
This is about an idea I was thinking about for several weeks now: How
the concept of "welfare function" which is frequently used in welfare
economics could fruitfully be used in the discussion of election
methods, too.
A "social welfare function" measures the "welfare" of a group of
10 matches
Mail list logo
