2 ms·
That doesn't mean the value of that travel is high. In fact it means the opposite: if the travel was so valuable, people would still do it when it's more diffic
by hannasanarion 8y ago
That doesn't mean the value of that travel is high. In fact it means the opposite: if the travel was so valuable, people would still do it when it's more difficult.
- code_duck 8y agoI think what happens is people make a decision of the effort and risk vs the reward, like every other activity.
- closeparen 8y agoSure, any rational person facing austerity cuts whatever they value least. And any rational person enjoying growth can only add whatever the value low enough to not have yet. Imagine the price of groceries rises to 100% of your wages, so you stop running the furnace. "If being warm were so valuable, you would still do it even when it means skipping a few meals." Welfare is still harmed by austerity and boosted by growth. A better line of argument, IMO: a denser environment would offer more value for less travel. Or, driving to a faraway discount store is only profitable because you pay 100% for manufactured goods and X < 100% for highway mileage.