Research Publication: A New Idea I Just Thought Of: Efficiency-Promoting Innovation Increases Essentialness of Goods and Helps the GDP In a Measurable Way

 

Consider the ideas regarding the priorities-list as utility bundle and the replacement coupons to capture a consumer changing her mind.  Also, consider the claim in another blog post on here that said that consumers never purchase "negative price replacement coupons" and never change their mind to replace a more expensive good with a less expensive good in their priorities list later on.


Now, consider the idea that an innovator figures out a way to produce a particular good, let's say, pencils, more efficiently.  What this does is, it drives the price of production of pencils down, and, it presumably therefore leads to some decrease in the price of the pencils for consumers.


The claim I'm making is:  This leads to pencils appearing strictly, in some cases, sooner in the priorities lists of some consumers.  Based on the idea (which I haven't really published yet) that, vaguely speaking, essential goods tend to appear earlier in aggregated priorities lists for consumers we have that pencils are becoming "more essential" due to this innovation.  Because pencils are appearing sooner in the priorities lists in some cases, their overall "essentialness" rating, all other things being equal, goes up in the economy or economic system/market that we are considering.


As I mentioned in the Essentialist Price Change Equilibrium post, the quality of being essential is important to the GDP; when essential goods decrease in price more as the GDP goes up more, that adheres to the "law of desperation" that I proposed in that other blog post.


Thus, when innovation occurs, a good becomes more essential and its price decreases at the same time.  It would appear that innovation, when its effect on prices of goods can be measured, can thus have an effect on the GDP, increasing it, that can be studied and calculated with some degree of precision by researchers.


That is my latest new idea.  I haven't been doing any reading of economics lately, so my new ideas are going to be "lighter" and less intense/valuable probably than my previous ones, according to my impressions anyway.  I'm claiming that there are probably tons of new ideas that could be turned into very useful laws about economics that come from my ideas proposed in the "Essentialist Price Change Equilibrium" blog post, especially based on the priorities list ideas and the replacement coupons idea.  This is just one of them.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Math Update: My P != NP Proof Might Be Correct!!!!! -- (update, no it's not, see the note at the beginning and the updates near the bottom)

EDIT:  No, this proof is not correct.  See the updates at the bottom for details on why (based on Dr. Zelinsky's comment).  Fortunately, my GLL proof and MSR proofs still appear to be correct. It could be that Joshua Zelinsky's comment actually helps me to complete the proof. The GLL proof appears to be correct, AFAIK. The thing is, the fact that we can prove "PA is consistent --> P != NP" within PA and the fact that we can prove "PA is consistent" as a theorem of ZFC just shows that P != NP is a theorem of PA.  That isn't a contradiction, it's just another step in the proof. I think the striking idea is, P != NP is a theorem of PA, but not of ZFC.  That is what I worked to prove.  AFAIK it is possible for a proposition to be a theorem of PA but not of ZFC.  In particular, PA can be proved consistent from ZFC, so we would think it s possible and even likely that there are some non-theorems of ZFC that are theorems of PA. So this is great!  It l...
Read more

Hello, Texas - A Quick Monopoly Lesson

  So today, I thought I saw some people running around blurting code gestures at me.  One of the codes seemed to say, "Riot for a[buse] v[ictim] time -M".  Oh, M?  M as in Monolith, or M as in Monopoly fan who doesn't get it? Here, Houstonian code-talkers...let me teach you how to play Monopoly, since you are so hungry for free knowledge:  - Make deals with other players that benefit you.  - Offer deals to difficult players that are somewhat beneficial to them, knowing that they might reject.  - Watch which deals other players reject, and identify what *deal types* they are not likely to accept from you or anyone else.  - Be very very careful about your own deals--and behavior--lest you get figured out by your opponents and backed into a corner, with good, beneficial deals being made without you by cunning adversaries who know your every move. There's a poker lesson in there, too, but I don't want to get too educational right now.
Read more

Flash Non-Fiction: James Bond and Masculinity

  This was going to be a longer essay, but I decided to just blurt out my point rather than trying to write well. Basically, I think James Bond movies are good, and the songs are high-quality too, but it sends semi-dangerous messages to men in particular about what it means to be a man.  The Bond character is intransigent, aggressive, violent, and absolutely sure of himself in all cases.  He is portrayed as a big winner--able to date and have sex with beautiful women, almost impossible to kill, and lethal and elite at both armed and unarmed combat. I'm concerned that some men, including my estranged father ASW, have had their sense of morality warped by Bond movies.  They think that this dramatically presented way to be masculine is the only way.  I think that's unhealthy, and when people get the not-so-original idea to "try to be more Bond-like" in their personal lives, that leads to catastrophic conflicts with and major potential for deep pain for people that ...
Read more