Re: [tlug] Open-source Japan

["Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@example.com>]

Edward Middleton writes:

 > > people who think that somebody else should take care of their
 > > *needs*.
 > 
 > Markets aside.  I presume you are talking as an Economist and making no
 > distinction between what most would consider wants (i.e. those things
 > you could live without) and needs (those essential for life).

Yes.  People who try to make a consistent distinction tangle
themselves up quickly.  Here I'm alluding to the common notion that
there is some "right" to receive what you "need".  But that's
imprecise, too.

 > Its a bit hard having a functioning society without relying on
 > others to take care of at at least some of your needs.

That depends on how you define "take care of".  Of course in society
we specialize, and thus rely on others to provide some things at our
request.  However, that is accomplished through exchange of values,
either through the market or otherwise.  Those values may be immediate
and tangible (money), or not ("she's my mother, and she raised me, and
that's good enough reason for me to take care of her in her old age").

All I'm saying here is that it's not the market's fault that it's hard
to evaluate the value of some goods.  Complaining about the weak
incentive in the market to accurately provide the quality you desire
is in part valid, but the market doesn't make things *worse*, and I do
not know of a good way to make things *better* without involving
markets -- and paying more for the higher quality information about
the goods being received.

The classic problematic example is medical service.  You may be
unconscious; you are certainly not expert.  So you depend on the
doctor to not only treat you, but also to decide what treatment is
appropriate, and the price.  That's an awful lot of power, and that's
why in English system countries it's usually a crime for a doctor to
violate the code of professional ethics.  However, there's also a
problem that the doctor's system of values may be quite different from
the patient's.  That's why we now insist on "informed consent".  The
doctor is allowed to make the expert judgment as to the expected
consequence of treatment, and the risk involved.  The patient,
however, makes the value decision.

Sofware is another such field, though the risks are usually not so
personal as with medicine.