PEN-L
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
Re: [PEN-L:8228] Re: Re: Re: Summers Memo
- Subject: Re: [PEN-L:8228] Re: Re: Re: Summers Memo
- From: "Anthony D'Costa" <dcosta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 23 Jun 1999 23:53:26 -0700 (PDT)
From:
Anthony P. D'Costa
Associate Professor
Comparative International Development
University of Washington
1900 Commerce Street
Tacoma, WA 98402, USA
Phone: (253) 692-4462
Fax : (253) 692-5612
On Wed, 23 Jun 1999, Brad De Long wrote:
> >
> >If the economic loss from a premature death is the present value of the
> >foregone income, then it is "impeccably logical" to view the death of an
> >African as less costly than that of a North American or Swede. Your
> >argument is all about raising welfare levels - I don't see how that has
> >much bearing on this murderous arithmetic.
>
> But it does: the market weights your well-being roughly in proportion to
> your income--that is what taking real GDP per capita to be your welfare
> index implies. No income, a zero weight. That's how market economies
> generate things like the Bengal famine of 1942.
I am not so sure that the Bengal famine was necessarily a result of lack
of purchasing power. One must also remember the colonial situation and
the chanelling of grains for the war effort.
>
> The point is that if you are doing neoclassical utilitarian economics
> correctly, you don't make the mistake of confusing social welfare with GDP
> per capita.
>
>
> Brad DeLong
>
>
- Thread context:
- [PEN-L:8308] RE: Re: Re: Bengali famine, (continued)
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]