She might also have had the more benign motivation of wanting to learn more about the world, so that she can help more effectively for the rest of her life.
It occurs to me that the help people give to their friends and family isn’t counted as charity, and it seems to me that it ought to count for something, even if it’s less formalized and less apt to help people outside a particular social network than official charity.
In the same spirit, I think that what people do for themselves should be part of the GDP.
Sort of like a capital investment in knowledge for the sake of improved performance down the road? That would have been perfectly rational. That could have been her motivation, but I don’t think it was. Given the story, doesn’t that sound like a rationalization to you?
You mean helping the people you actually care about “ought to count for something”? What a strange idea. Your own happiness should count for something too? Who knew?
As for counting what you do for yourself as part of GDP, maybe we should just stop mistaking GDP for an indicator of gross production of value? Governments like GDP, because it records transactions that they are interested in—what they might tax, and what they spend. And it counts every dollar they spend of other people’s money, or money they create out of thin air, the same as a dollar that people earn and spend for themselves. That’s a cute little sleight of thought.
She might also have had the more benign motivation of wanting to learn more about the world, so that she can help more effectively for the rest of her life.
It occurs to me that the help people give to their friends and family isn’t counted as charity, and it seems to me that it ought to count for something, even if it’s less formalized and less apt to help people outside a particular social network than official charity.
In the same spirit, I think that what people do for themselves should be part of the GDP.
Sort of like a capital investment in knowledge for the sake of improved performance down the road? That would have been perfectly rational. That could have been her motivation, but I don’t think it was. Given the story, doesn’t that sound like a rationalization to you?
You mean helping the people you actually care about “ought to count for something”? What a strange idea. Your own happiness should count for something too? Who knew?
As for counting what you do for yourself as part of GDP, maybe we should just stop mistaking GDP for an indicator of gross production of value? Governments like GDP, because it records transactions that they are interested in—what they might tax, and what they spend. And it counts every dollar they spend of other people’s money, or money they create out of thin air, the same as a dollar that people earn and spend for themselves. That’s a cute little sleight of thought.