3 ms·
Are you willing to even consider that what you're calling rational might not actually be rational? It's one thing to say you want to subsidize $group with some
by Consultant32452 9y ago
Are you willing to even consider that what you're calling rational might not actually be rational?
It's one thing to say you want to subsidize $group with some sort of legislation because it's moral or better for the broader economy, etc. It's another thing entirely to claim to be forcing any individual company to be acting in its own best interest.
- AstralStorm 9y agoThe problem is that some people take rational for optimal. Real markets are neither clearly rational nor clearly optimal. Rationalizing is the best way to put it. To prove that age discrimination is rational you would have to show real reasons to prefer younger workers. Showing lower pay is not enough of there are costs. Have to show that the costs are outweighting the benefits. Remember the shape of modern developed nation agree structure.
- Consultant32452 9y agoI'm not making the claim that age discrimination is rational or optimal. I'm merely suggesting that you may not have enough information to claim that it isn't optimal. It's fairly easy to show that age discrimination exists, but far more difficult to show that it's not optimal, especially in an environment in which it's both illegal and socially taboo. And secondly, even if keeping the older workers is both rational and optimal for the business it's not clear to me why we should force a company to do it. If the shareholders feel the company is not acting in their best interest there are mechanisms in place for them to deal with that.