You do realize that valuing equality in itself to any extent at all is always (because of opportunity cost at least) an example of this:
People have been demonstrably willing to make everyone live at a lower standard of living rather than let a tiny minority grow obscenely rich and everyone else be moderately well off.
But I agree with you in sense. Historically lots of horrible people have vastly overpaid (often in blood) and overvalued that particular good according to my values too.
You do realize that valuing equality in itself to any extent at all is always (because of opportunity cost at least) an example of this:
Are you sure?
If you take a concave function, such as a log, of the net happiness of each individual, and maximize the sum, you’d always prefer equality to inequality when net happiness is held constant, and you’d always prefer a higher minimum happiness regardless of inequality.
You do realize that valuing equality in itself to any extent at all is always (because of opportunity cost at least) an example of this:
But I agree with you in sense. Historically lots of horrible people have vastly overpaid (often in blood) and overvalued that particular good according to my values too.
Are you sure?
If you take a concave function, such as a log, of the net happiness of each individual, and maximize the sum, you’d always prefer equality to inequality when net happiness is held constant, and you’d always prefer a higher minimum happiness regardless of inequality.
Excellent! Thanks for the mathematical model! I’ve been trying to work out how to describe this principle for ages.
Yes.
Ok just checking, surprisingly many people miss this. :)