That you can
Use math values to assign mathematical values to items
then mathematically sum these values, and then trade(where the improvement is) and mathematically show it is better.
They also say that gift giving is inherently flawed- to me, this is some flawed logic and ignoring the value to the giver, and the socio-cultural norms.
The premise is not correct: Gift giving is alway efficient. The giver of the gift is acting in a voluntary manner and using their property in a manner they see fit without damaging the person or property of someone else. So the action of giving the gift is by defnition efficient. Now the receiver may not want the gift presented to them as much as something else but it is still efficient as the receiver would reject the gift otherwise.
If the giver was coerced, then it is no longer a gift but a transfer. This is why I hate using the tax code to provide philanthropy. The philanthropists are not really that good as the ones giving large sum see a government sponsored tax incentive to do so. And without that tax crap, I bet people would give more to charities not less.
Only bad economists would hate the concept of gift giving. I see nothing in the process of gift giving that an Austrian Economist would take issue with. In the report from NPR there are two institutions that Austrians do take issue with: 1. NPR-Tax funded radio and 2. Public School.
I also had problem that this numerical scale is faulty as who can honestly assign numbers, consistently, across people- humans can order first, second, third, but not assign I like A 10, B 7 and C 5, giving the 1st, 2nd 3rd order. Especially as a 5 to one person may be a 10 for someone with a lower happiness need.
I hate the concept of gift-giving. Consider: here I am, wanting to make you happy (to the tune of $50.) I expend energy going out and buying something, and give it to you. There is a miniscule chance that it’s exactly what you’d buy for yourself, which is the best possible outcome. Most of the time, it isn’t. The whole practice strikes me as silly and wasteful, especially if you’re doing the same thing. Why not just call me and say “let’s each spend $50 however we want and call it a day”? That also leaves open the possibility of saving the money.
The worst is, the appeal to ownership to explain gifting is inconsistent. If you want to say “well it’s my $50 and I choose to use it for a gift” ok, fine. But then why do gift-givers, after giving the gift, think they still should be able to make demands regarding the use of the gift? What do I mean? I mean they get insulted if you don’t wear the sweater, they ask “why aren’t you wearing it?” they get annoyed if you return it, and the gates of hell open up if you choose to use it for another gift.
Jak, gifts don’t aim directly at hapiness. They’re mainly a bonding device as (young) adults.
Though I agree for children gifts are all about the physical content!
Gift cards - I go to the mall and give them $53, for which they give me a card that I can give to my friend on which he can spend $50 - as long as he spends it in the right store and within the right amount of time. He’s not allowed to save it, or use it towards tuition - nope, he has to spend it at the mall, even if he doesn’t want anything there, and he has to do it within 3 months or else it loses value. I might as well have just given him cash - but wait, by the same reasoning he could have given me cash (or gold), and we’re even…
More directly, if I give him a gift card and he gives me a gift card, we’re still even, unless the values are different, then it just reveals who cares less.
As for control freaks, I’d say I accurately described most gift-givers I’ve come across. If you’re only defending gift-giving when that behavior is not present, you’re describing a small proportion of the gift-giving in the world. There’s even a Seinfeld episode about people being offended by ‘regifting.’
Only bad economists would hate the concept of gift giving.
Not necessarily, one could argue that there are multiple equilibria and that we’re currently locked into one in which gift giving is expected despite the fact that in welfare terms it is worse than the equilibrium without gift giving. I’m not saying that I necessarily endorse this argument, but I think there’s a lot more to be said about the institution of gift giving than just “revealed preference says that it is good”.
There’s all sorts of interesting things that can be said about it, such as the intrinsic value of receiving gift, the power of social conventions and expectations, the signalling value of presents and so on and so forth. In some cases we just buy presents because they’ve bought us one and it is expected that we reciprocate in other cases we want to buy presents to signal that we know somebody’s preferences and/or we case.