Marginal analysis of economic freedomS and poverty

aka, Economic freedomS, poverty and marginal utility

(Please review addendum closely for important and irreversible information on the use of this document, or alternatively view peopleS for additional clarification on the intended purpose of associated creative license(S)).

It has been claimed and shown in many ways that declining marginal utility applies to most things, and cold hard cash, which can be transformed easily into most factors and products, is no exception.

Borrowing from the field of resource economics and “option values,” but applying this to the analysis of marginal utility along the income curve, I now make the argument for a strong and additional factor to be accounted for when performing marginal analysis of utility in relation to income. Namely, economic freedomS should be viewed as not only the theoretical ability, but the actual ability, to partake in the use or consumption of products. It is only when the actual economic capacity exists to access said products on some form of market that the economic freedom can manifest itself. Thus, not only does marginal utility increase much more rapidly at lower levels of income due to the sheer utility of the products they can access with each new dollar (or in more particular cases, the utility of cash where market supply becomes dysfunctional due to cash shortages), but economic actors may also benefit from the whole world of possibility that opens up as their income rises, so long as they do not become infatuated with the chase for more and ever more. This could hardly be considered as insignificant to considerations of marginal benefit incidence analysis or any form of marginal income analysis, although empirical justifications and verifications may be troublesome to nail down, just as humans tend to be.

Then again, what does it mean to not have the option to obtain some products if the associated economic opportunities/freedomS had never crossed your mind, where by economic freedomS I mean the ability to access factors and products, generally on markets.

Option values, externalities and sympathy. What if everyone gave a shit?: Not only obtaining benefit from the option values of things you could partake in, but as a mind game, let’s consider that you could actively take note of and appreciate externalities (whether convenience, aesthetics, nature, etc. through the efforts of people working (or having worked) in relation to where you are and what you’re doing, and perhaps even striving so far as to include positive sympathy of others’ welfare as you go about your day) then so long as things are OK enough we can all eat a free lunch and maybe even work at becoming a little more cooperative. Giving a shit is a free lunch unless not everything’s OK. What if everyone gave a shit?

Jealousy brings it down: Inequality, opportunity and public welfare: The first two arguments also constitute the bases the current argument that jealousy brings it down, i.e., negatively impacts public welfare. This can’t be forgotten when considering how inequality affects social welfare … and we haven’t even gotten started on economic opportunity, inequality, mobility, networks and labour markets in this context. It’s hard to say what exactly any given person wants when speaking of the economic opportunity side of economic freedomS, although aggregate information can certainly provide some useful clues on where they actually end up.

Addendum: For the general welfare of peopleS, I hereby lay claim to the capitalization of S at the end of a word. Any use of this strategy to highlight a plural in a word renders the entire document and/or accompanying products it belongs to (including appendices, accompanying data, any gear intended to be purchased complementary to the saleS item, etc.) subject to the most recent rules and regulations established by the Creative Commons, or any commonly used replacement to the Creative Commons with the mission of ensuring the ability of individuals and organizations to ensure free access to certain intellectual materials for all generations to come, particularly in the digital realm. This last paper carries out a marginal income analysis of a representative sample of Monsanto shareholderS and a representative sample of African farmerS, then aims to determine fair market price if the shareholderS gave 1/2 a shit.

I have an album to record, soon enough.

About admin

Some guy
This entry was posted in Development, Economics and philosophy, Economics, pure theory, Political philosophy, Political science. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply