Love is a function of sacrifice

Comment on: David Henderson Doubles Down on a Calculated Love

********************************************

Forgetting about the alternative uses of your limited resources sounds more like infatuation than love. Love is a function of sacrifice. And sacrifice is only meaningful when there’s choice involved. And there’s no choice involved if there are no alternatives and/or you’ve simply forgotten about them.

Buchanan’s point was a rebuttal to Samuelson’s mathiness belief that utility functions could be derived and are fixed. The more you appreciate the soundness of Buchanan’s belief and the absurdity of Samuelson’s belief the more you support the conclusion that taxpayers should be free to choose where their taxes go.

If Lilith the liberal allocates all her taxes to the EPA… then this is meaningful if, and only if, she deliberately and knowingly chose to sacrifice the alternative uses of her tax dollars. It’s not meaningful if…

A. there are no alternatives

or

B. she forgot about the alternatives

Not sure if you saw the movie “Mr. Nobody” but it’s quite excellent in how it clarifies the alternatives. Here’s a clip…