3 ms·

Making glass is probably a good industry to work in, but we don’t wish to employ window breakers to keep them busy.

• bee_rider 3y ago
  Two thoughts: First: Are glass makers/window breakers actually an externality? I guess the broken glass (not cleaned up by anybody, so the price is foist on society) could be considered an externality, but that isn’t typically the point of that story. Aside: Or maybe, since breaking windows is usually a crime, having people break windows as a job might incline them toward other crimes. And further, if the field of window breaking is lucrative and these window-breakers become admired as a result, it could maybe cause a general increased tendency toward criminality in society! This could be seen as an externality, bringing in the other story about broken windows. Maybe we’re close to discovering the grand unified theory of broken windows! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_windows_theory . Second: Poorly made umbrellas seem quite different from glass makers/breakers. There’s a price:quality trade off with umbrellas, it just isn’t where you (and I, actually, I prefer a good solid umbrella too) want it to be. The glass maker/breaker story is about the silliness of intentionally destroying something the folks who made it can make money replacing it. Anyway, I think the umbrella employees aren’t an externality, they are just part of the cost of doing business.