On one hand, "ya, I know." On the other, anger is my muse and while this distracted me from something else, the core argument is a real issue. Too many people don't think about things beyond "I voted (didn't vote) for him so I must defend (attack) everything he does."
I've been accused of selectively caring about government waste. And it's true, but not because I give one side a free ride. I spend some of my time arguing against government waste because we don't have limitless funds and should be prioritizing. That doesn't mean that some things aren't more important than money or that everything the government does is waste.
At the end of the day everything I write is a form of practice. Hopefully it's improving my writing.
I'll get back to the important things now. Or just as soon as I'm done procrastinating.
I think by now you know that I am a huge fan of your work (even though we often disagree). Your writing is thoughtful and you take the time to consider other points of view.
I think that much of your frustration is the product of the blissful ignorance many people display for basic economics.
When it comes to government spending or policy decisions the key concept is “opportunity cost”—the potential benefit that is missed when one choice is made over another. It's the cost of the next best alternative that's forgone when a decision is made. In essence, it represents what you give up by choosing one option.
Thomas Sowell leans heavily on this idea when he repeatedly writes: “there are no solutions, only tradeoffs”. This idea is rooted in the economic concept of scarcity, meaning that resources (like time, money, or attention) are limited, while human wants and needs are virtually limitless.
Examples of Trade-offs:
* Work vs. Life: Spending more time on work to earn more money might mean having less time for family and friends.
* Public Policy: A government increasing funding for education might need to decrease funding for other areas like healthcare or infrastructure.
There are no “perfect solutions”. In life there are only 24-hours in a day so “time” is not only a scarce resource but our most valuable resource. What we choose to do with our time is an opportunity cost to the rest of our lives. When we spend time working or playing or doing something else or nothing else, it always costs us another option or next best alternative. This is why our individual liberty is sacred.
Very true. Society would be much better off if this was taught to every grade school student (I'd settle for high school actually).
I understand what you're saying and how it applies to what I choose to write. Honestly, I get a sense of accomplishment whenever I publish something, even the ones that are mediocre. It can't all be Hamlet after all.
I occasionally think "will anyone like this" before deciding I don't care I'm writing it because I want to. That was the case with this article. With a little "ugh this other piece isn't flowing, I need a break from it."
I can’t believe you wrote a whole post to defend what amounted to nothing (statistically).
I got mad respect for your work! Great job.
PS—What would you need to write to defend a real issue?
On one hand, "ya, I know." On the other, anger is my muse and while this distracted me from something else, the core argument is a real issue. Too many people don't think about things beyond "I voted (didn't vote) for him so I must defend (attack) everything he does."
I've been accused of selectively caring about government waste. And it's true, but not because I give one side a free ride. I spend some of my time arguing against government waste because we don't have limitless funds and should be prioritizing. That doesn't mean that some things aren't more important than money or that everything the government does is waste.
At the end of the day everything I write is a form of practice. Hopefully it's improving my writing.
I'll get back to the important things now. Or just as soon as I'm done procrastinating.
Oh, and thanks for the compliment.
Phil,
I think by now you know that I am a huge fan of your work (even though we often disagree). Your writing is thoughtful and you take the time to consider other points of view.
I think that much of your frustration is the product of the blissful ignorance many people display for basic economics.
When it comes to government spending or policy decisions the key concept is “opportunity cost”—the potential benefit that is missed when one choice is made over another. It's the cost of the next best alternative that's forgone when a decision is made. In essence, it represents what you give up by choosing one option.
Thomas Sowell leans heavily on this idea when he repeatedly writes: “there are no solutions, only tradeoffs”. This idea is rooted in the economic concept of scarcity, meaning that resources (like time, money, or attention) are limited, while human wants and needs are virtually limitless.
Examples of Trade-offs:
* Work vs. Life: Spending more time on work to earn more money might mean having less time for family and friends.
* Public Policy: A government increasing funding for education might need to decrease funding for other areas like healthcare or infrastructure.
There are no “perfect solutions”. In life there are only 24-hours in a day so “time” is not only a scarce resource but our most valuable resource. What we choose to do with our time is an opportunity cost to the rest of our lives. When we spend time working or playing or doing something else or nothing else, it always costs us another option or next best alternative. This is why our individual liberty is sacred.
Very true. Society would be much better off if this was taught to every grade school student (I'd settle for high school actually).
I understand what you're saying and how it applies to what I choose to write. Honestly, I get a sense of accomplishment whenever I publish something, even the ones that are mediocre. It can't all be Hamlet after all.
I occasionally think "will anyone like this" before deciding I don't care I'm writing it because I want to. That was the case with this article. With a little "ugh this other piece isn't flowing, I need a break from it."
The issue was that this parade should not worry you about cost; it should worry you about Trump, (and his megalomania, my words.)
Thanks for understanding.
Can't get too excited about this issue.
"Can't" or "shouldn't?"