The value(s) we trade
We see trading primarily as involving monetary value, but it is when it involves values that it is truly meaningful
We see trading primarily as involving monetary value, but it is when it involves values that it is truly meaningful
Barely a week ago, a British government minister resigned. This in itself is no longer big news in these somewhat surreal times (another minister did the same just a few days later). But the fact that it concerned the prime minister’s brother gave the event some extra prominence.
Why had Jo Johnson resigned? He was quoted as being “torn between family loyalty and the national interest”. It may not be immediately obvious, but choices like this are, in essence, a matter of economics. One of the issues with which the dismal science concerns itself is the allocation of scarce resources. A piece of cake is a such a scarce resource: you can either have it, or eat it, but not both. Whenever you can either have one thing, or another, but not both — either having the cake or eating it, either serving family loyalty or the national interest — you have to decide which of the two mutually incompatible options is ‘best’. Choosing one means giving up the other. In economic terms, you trade one for the other.
