Well, if externalities in the now were not vexing enough, the concept of intertemporal externalities up the ante by an unknown, and perhaps unknowable factor. I will have to read this article a few more times, for sure, before I can absorb the whole of it, if I ever do. I think your proposition has a substantial intersection with pure philosophy, which is fascinating to me personally. I will want to formulate a set of questions to pose to you when I make my next pass through your article.
I’m trying to explain this simply, so if it’s still confusing, that’s my fault. The usual way people talk about externalities is as an effect on a third party happening in today’s markets. So, even if the consequence plays out later, the market inefficiency is still happening right now. But what I’m focused on is different—I’m thinking about how our actions today affect the efficiency of markets in the future.
No, that's not what I'm saying; I'm not confused. I understand what your basic premise is. My reply didn't convey what I'm thinking very well. My bad. You talked earlier about "infinities" that complicate math modeling. There's a reason for that. Quantum physics has the same problem. I understand your fundamental premise. It's the implications of the premise and how to think about whether the premise matters that is complex.
Well, if externalities in the now were not vexing enough, the concept of intertemporal externalities up the ante by an unknown, and perhaps unknowable factor. I will have to read this article a few more times, for sure, before I can absorb the whole of it, if I ever do. I think your proposition has a substantial intersection with pure philosophy, which is fascinating to me personally. I will want to formulate a set of questions to pose to you when I make my next pass through your article.
I’m trying to explain this simply, so if it’s still confusing, that’s my fault. The usual way people talk about externalities is as an effect on a third party happening in today’s markets. So, even if the consequence plays out later, the market inefficiency is still happening right now. But what I’m focused on is different—I’m thinking about how our actions today affect the efficiency of markets in the future.
No, that's not what I'm saying; I'm not confused. I understand what your basic premise is. My reply didn't convey what I'm thinking very well. My bad. You talked earlier about "infinities" that complicate math modeling. There's a reason for that. Quantum physics has the same problem. I understand your fundamental premise. It's the implications of the premise and how to think about whether the premise matters that is complex.