Is it just me, or does assessing things qua Kaldor-Hicks double-count money in successive situations?
You mean in the case where change A is a KH improvement with transfer X (which then doesn't happen) and after that change B is found to be a KH improvement with transfer Y in the world where transfer X didn't happen?
-
-
Yes. If Alice wants to e.g. hunt the most dangerous game and restricts herself to what she could hypothetically afford, but never actually coughs up, she can out-hunt her budget, *and* still be mega-rich, and it'll all be Kaldor-Hicks approved.
-
I think that just means that it's not associative
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.