A Subtle Redefinition In Opportunity Cost

I am going to redefine Opportunity Cost from the difference between one choice and another, to include the opportunity of expending violence. Because that is the FIRST cost that they pay in every transaction.

I’m going to redefine Time preference from the silly Austrian implication that all purchasing decisions are made primarily by price, to the acknowledgement that all prices are in fact habits, and that decisions are made primarily by the culmination of OTHER factors, (and logically must be since prices are rarely different in any meaningful way) such that Time Preference is the aggregate approach to either consumption or capitalization. Such that a high time preference in the classical sense means consumption, and therefore is a short time preference, and that low time preference in the classical sense means capitalization, and therefore is a long time preference.

A subtle difference, but the difference is meaningful: people do not care about prices between one object and another as much as they care about the other properties. In a universe of aesthetic rather than material differences, Prices simply allow people to categorize similar choices together so that they can apply other preferences, social biases, and subsidies. Because unlike the idea types to derive from marginalism’s attempt to make possible quantification, people actually ACT in the way I describe, even though that way is resistant to modeling.


Leave a Reply