<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Moral compass in the invisble hand</title>
	<atom:link href="http://enthusiasm.cozy.org/archives/2007/05/moral-compass-in-the-invisble-hand/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://enthusiasm.cozy.org/archives/2007/05/moral-compass-in-the-invisble-hand</link>
	<description>Ben Hyde</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 31 Jan 2012 13:18:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: bhyde</title>
		<link>http://enthusiasm.cozy.org/archives/2007/05/moral-compass-in-the-invisble-hand/comment-page-1#comment-899</link>
		<dc:creator>bhyde</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 May 2007 21:15:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://enthusiasm.cozy.org/archives/2007/05/moral-compass-in-the-invisble-hand/#comment-899</guid>
		<description>Santiago;

Right, efficiency always serves one metric v.s. another.

oh, and thanks - link is fixed. - ben</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Santiago;</p>
<p>Right, efficiency always serves one metric v.s. another.</p>
<p>oh, and thanks &#8211; link is fixed. &#8211; ben</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Santiago Gala</title>
		<link>http://enthusiasm.cozy.org/archives/2007/05/moral-compass-in-the-invisble-hand/comment-page-1#comment-898</link>
		<dc:creator>Santiago Gala</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 20 May 2007 20:47:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://enthusiasm.cozy.org/archives/2007/05/moral-compass-in-the-invisble-hand/#comment-898</guid>
		<description>I recently blogged that I don&#039;t like &quot;efficiency&quot; as an overall economic drive, because it is not... eficient, say for the ants, to have an allmighty anthill. :)

While I know it is difficult for economists to over-simplify on other principles, I&#039;d bet on a slight increase in &quot;friction&quot;, say Social Security or unemployment, over a 100% efficient &quot;killer&quot; economy.

Oh, and The Financial Times link is broken (as seen from here).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I recently blogged that I don&#8217;t like &#8220;efficiency&#8221; as an overall economic drive, because it is not&#8230; eficient, say for the ants, to have an allmighty anthill. <img src='http://enthusiasm.cozy.org/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>While I know it is difficult for economists to over-simplify on other principles, I&#8217;d bet on a slight increase in &#8220;friction&#8221;, say Social Security or unemployment, over a 100% efficient &#8220;killer&#8221; economy.</p>
<p>Oh, and The Financial Times link is broken (as seen from here).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

