Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Diminishing Returns

  1. #1

    Default Diminishing Returns

    Warning! This is one of those vague open-ended threads, waiting for discussion to suss it out.

    Lately I've been struck by the idea that we (as humans, as societies) have either lost the ability to recognize "diminishing returns", or have become so accustomed to progress (or future potential), that optimism becomes dangerous or defeating.

    You may be thinking to yourself, "WTF are you talking about, GeeGee"? Well, I don't really know just yet. But let's give it a go, shall we? Put on your thinking caps, grab your popcorn.


    1) Longevity. Often "at any cost" or "at all costs". Subtopics: health care, energy, environment, sustainability

    2) Equity. Another moving target. Subtopics: law, civil rights, regulation, education/information

    3) Power. Abstract and/or concrete. Subtopics: all of the above, plus War, global relations


    All those things involve wealth and government; economics and politics. There's an element of trust/mistrust, history and perception, too. I was thinking about Case Study type examples, where we weigh benefits and costs in every day life, without really thinking too hard about it.

    The premie baby with multiple anomolies vs the elderly cardiac cripple.
    The rural outskirts vs metro-urban or ex-urban sprawl.
    The inner city minority student vs the unemployed suburban adult.
    The citizens and migrants vs the immigrants. [And everyone against "The Terrorist"]
    The established industries of the 20th century vs the new industries of the 21st.
    The *declining* first world nations vs the emerging third world nations.

    Etc. Seems to me we want to have it all, do it all, Be All, the world is our oyster, and every oyster has a pearl. So much so, that we can't/won't stop diving even without oxygen. Maybe a better analogy is the gambler who wins enough pots to keep gambling, but stays at the table one hand too long?

    Diminishing Returns. How do you quantify or qualify that?


  2. #2
    Oh yeah, I forgot to mention. Narcissist Personality Disorder has been removed from the diagnostic manual. Seems we've all become so self-centered that it's considered "normal"? I'd say Facebook and Twitter confirm that, but it may piss some people off.

  3. #3
    I really don't know in what regard to tie in everything you listed. But there are diminishing returns on everything we do it's simply that as we develop new technologies (which I use loosely) we keep switching PPF (production possibility frontiers) so we're changing the curve we're on, if we were to remain on any given curve we'd see diminishing returns. If we zoom out further though we realize there is a finitness to resource and improvements on tasks so there will be these diminishing returns.

    As for longevity, that's a cost benifit analysis question we value our own lives a lot and generally speaking if you can make something last longer the more return or value you get from it. However if the upfront or ongoing cost to sustain something is high enough we could not do it.

    Education I really think it's worth every penny we spend on it, but you're right there is a point where money does nothing how much better do we learn with our laser pointers and interactive touch screens than a class room where a teacher has a stick and a chalk board to teach from. Is really the innovation needed not money, but having good teachers and motivated students?

    I think the analogy of someone playing one to many hands in poker is not the best, I don't think we should ever quit investing in these things perhaps throwing money at to quickly. this year perhaps roughyl the same will be accomplished with 10million dollars as 11 million for a given task. Because we're already funding the most bang for the buck, and everything else has high (you guessed it) diminishing return.

    If your point is we need to not spend more but spend smarter then I think you're making a good point.

  4. #4
    Holy crap, Lebbie! I read your post twice and kinda sorta knew where you were going. But I still got lost. Your last sentence was the bestest.

    If your point is we need to not spend more but spend smarter then I think you're making a good point.
    So, who here would say their elderly grandma should not expect (or get) medical care for her maladies, in order to provide care for a newborn premature babe? What if granny is a spritely 60 year old with treatable (but expensive) conditions like Diabetes or hypertension, but the newborn needs open heart surgery, or expensive interferon therapy?

    Can we do both? What if trying to do both is bankrupting entire nations, relegating them to impotence?

    Can we provide care for both? Are we just in a temporary sandwich spot, or are we

    wandering from the main mission

  5. #5
    Quote Originally Posted by GGT View Post
    Oh yeah, I forgot to mention. Narcissist Personality Disorder has been removed from the diagnostic manual. Seems we've all become so self-centered that it's considered "normal"? I'd say Facebook and Twitter confirm that, but it may piss some people off.
    I'd say your speculations on this score are right on target.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •