From: John Conover <john@email.johncon.com>
Subject: forwarded message from Kimberly Bodelson
Date: Tue, 9 Jan 1996 12:37:33 -0800
FYI. This is kind of interesting. This is an application of
game-theoretic methodology to economic theory. It undermines the
validity of the concept of re-distribution of wealth. Most economists
have expressed doubt that the concept of re-distribution of wealth is
workable, but here, a formal argument is presented. Most have said, at
least privately, that the only equitable way of solving the social
welfare function is through general economic prosperity-like Parker,
(of Parker's law fame, strangely enough,) which states that of all
priorities, the economic priority will be ranked first-which is kind
of contradictory to Kenneth Arrow's so called impossibility theorem,
which states that priorities are intransitive, and there is no
rational method by which priorities can be ordered, or ranked, (as
long as there are more than two priorities.) Both Parker and Arrow are
economists and have made significant contributions to the field using
game-theoretic techniques. It would seem that the concept of
increasing general prosperity, as opposed to re-arranging it, would
seem to reconcile the issues of both. Of course, an interpretation, if
it is true, is that the constricting economies, (as a fraction of
world GNP-like the United States, and most industrial nations, for
that matter,) are probably going to have a hard time in the
future-when the have and have nots become super polarized-and Parker
is shown to be right when social conventions are ignored with the
resulting social upheaval. If the attached stands, it would seem that
the number one responsibility of any government would be expansion of
economic prosperity. Of course, the spotted owl and their lobby would
have a different opinion.
John
--
John Conover, john@email.johncon.com, http://www.johncon.com/