I think Chris is pointing to the idea that the benefits of alcohol (and other targets of âthis style of reasoningâ) might be real, even if they arenât monetary. e.g. for alcohol, imagine there is major positive effect where alcohol leads to more socialising. This isnât easy to represent monetarily, but that doesnât mean it isnât real. The style of reasoning he is pointing to is one where youâve already measured the downside, and then wave away the upside.
Iâm curious to understand what you mean by this. I donât know if the implication is meant to be self-evident, but I have trouble getting it.
I think Chris is pointing to the idea that the benefits of alcohol (and other targets of âthis style of reasoningâ) might be real, even if they arenât monetary.
e.g. for alcohol, imagine there is major positive effect where alcohol leads to more socialising. This isnât easy to represent monetarily, but that doesnât mean it isnât real. The style of reasoning he is pointing to is one where youâve already measured the downside, and then wave away the upside.
Exactly!