Here is what is missing in your analysis. Value is (always) a relative term. For example the value (cost) of your sister’s art work is whatever anyone is willing to pay for it. It has no inherent value, only a use value. The fallacy in your argument is that some things are inherently more valuable than others. But that presumes that the assigning of value is done on some kind of “objective” basis. But there is no such thing. Value is a creation of the objects relation to the humans that interact with it. If you want to address the extreme example to illustrate the point, you need to consider that even global warming, which could result in the destruction of life on the planet, is not, from the standpoint of cosmological physics, a dictate that is ordained by any measure “value.” Follow the science!
I appreciate your comment, Jack. I agree that "value" is a relative term, but I also believe, specifically in relation to both art and the proposed infrastructure packages, that value is a concept completely different from cost and cannot be assigned a number. The monetary cost of these infrastructure proposals has no relation, by anyone's measure, to the value that this investment of government money will create. And that value could be how much better people feel when they have a steady, good paying job, of the decline in illnesses from not having to breath polluted air, of not losing people in a bridge collapse.
I'd love to hear more thoughts on this from everyone!
Well many repubs do not want Biden to succeed at anything so that's their game; Manchin has on blinders and coal dust in his eyes and can only see the cost. They are not weighing the ongoing value of Biden's infrastructure plan no matter that he considerably lowered the cost from the original. He must get this passed before midterm elections, just in case.....
Here is what is missing in your analysis. Value is (always) a relative term. For example the value (cost) of your sister’s art work is whatever anyone is willing to pay for it. It has no inherent value, only a use value. The fallacy in your argument is that some things are inherently more valuable than others. But that presumes that the assigning of value is done on some kind of “objective” basis. But there is no such thing. Value is a creation of the objects relation to the humans that interact with it. If you want to address the extreme example to illustrate the point, you need to consider that even global warming, which could result in the destruction of life on the planet, is not, from the standpoint of cosmological physics, a dictate that is ordained by any measure “value.” Follow the science!
I appreciate your comment, Jack. I agree that "value" is a relative term, but I also believe, specifically in relation to both art and the proposed infrastructure packages, that value is a concept completely different from cost and cannot be assigned a number. The monetary cost of these infrastructure proposals has no relation, by anyone's measure, to the value that this investment of government money will create. And that value could be how much better people feel when they have a steady, good paying job, of the decline in illnesses from not having to breath polluted air, of not losing people in a bridge collapse.
I'd love to hear more thoughts on this from everyone!
Actually the main issue is between moderate and progressive democrats, as I learned from NPR!
Well many repubs do not want Biden to succeed at anything so that's their game; Manchin has on blinders and coal dust in his eyes and can only see the cost. They are not weighing the ongoing value of Biden's infrastructure plan no matter that he considerably lowered the cost from the original. He must get this passed before midterm elections, just in case.....
Agreed. It will take a miracle to get both bills passed...