5 ms·
It's a very subtle issue I can't go fully into here. I agree with a lot of your concerns. Personally I would usually go for cost-welfare analysis rather than co
by robertwiblin 9y ago
It's a very subtle issue I can't go fully into here. I agree with a lot of your concerns. Personally I would usually go for cost-welfare analysis rather than cost-benefit analysis, which resolves many of the problems you're concerned about.
- conjectures 9y agoSure, I was just hoping to move you a little towards the position that lazy exponential discounting is generally not compatible with longtermism. In terms of behaviour change, giving a mixed message is just going to excuse people falling back into the default method. This is what thoughtless acceptance of the default means: http://www.heritage.org/environment/report/discounting-climate-costs http://www.heritage.org/environment/report/discounting-clima... http://www.heritage.org/government-regulation/report/questions-epas-cost-estimates-waxman-markey-climate-change-legislation http://www.heritage.org/government-regulation/report/questio... So I think there's a real cost and risk associated with not taking a clear position on this.