> This attitude strikes me as naive. Much of "what you have" is only valuable relative to what others have.
Not at all. The pleasure that I get from a trip to Mexico is not affected by whether someone else can go Fiji. The benefit that I get from owning a house in San Jose has nothing to do with the cost of Bill Gates' mansion. The fun that I have driving my car isn't affected by the amount of money that Larry Ellison spends on boats.
> This is especially true of cash
Actually, it's the least true of cash.
> but also true of illiquid goods that you value at least partly for their social function or status.
There's your problem - you're assuming that I care about what other people have after I explicitly said that I don't.
As Feynman said, why do you care what other people think?
Or rather, if you do, isn't that your problem? Why should that problem justify doing anything to other people?
> Would driving a Porsche (say) be exactly as valuable to you whether or not everyone else had one?
Absolutely, Except that I want a Jaguar, not a Porsche.
Not at all. The pleasure that I get from a trip to Mexico is not affected by whether someone else can go Fiji. The benefit that I get from owning a house in San Jose has nothing to do with the cost of Bill Gates' mansion. The fun that I have driving my car isn't affected by the amount of money that Larry Ellison spends on boats.
> This is especially true of cash
Actually, it's the least true of cash.
> but also true of illiquid goods that you value at least partly for their social function or status.
There's your problem - you're assuming that I care about what other people have after I explicitly said that I don't.
As Feynman said, why do you care what other people think?
Or rather, if you do, isn't that your problem? Why should that problem justify doing anything to other people?
> Would driving a Porsche (say) be exactly as valuable to you whether or not everyone else had one?
Absolutely, Except that I want a Jaguar, not a Porsche.