On Sun, Sep 12, 2004 at 11:47:13AM -0700, Ray Saintonge wrote:
There are certainly undetermined factors involved. A long accepted premise among economists is that people would act rationally. Rationality in this context was defined in terms of bettering one's economic situation. This thread of rationality could be applied very conveniently at both the micro- and macroeconomic level. For the economist taking time off work to care for a sick child is not a rational act.
But of course it is rational. The benefit due to improvement in one's child's health is much greater than loss because of not working.
Even in the most diehard classical economy, the money is just a means for getting the actual goods, and in this case you can obtain much more valuable goods some other way.
I don't mean that classical economy is correct, or that people are acting rationally in some way, but this example is terribly wrong.