Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Overcoming Bias Commenter's avatar

Explicitly exempting those criminals who are hardest to catch would mean effectively subsidizing the practice of coming up with better ways to evade and baffle the police. No government I am aware of has ever been stupid enough to create a perverse incentive of that magnitude.

Expand full comment
Overcoming Bias Commenter's avatar

Why should we exempt the hard to catch? Duh! Ever hear of cost-benefit analysis?

You look at the costs (in money, opportunity cost, etc.) of enforcement of a hard-to-catch undesirable act (which will be significantly higher than an easy-to-catch act), and compare it to the costs of the problem itself.

For a whole shitload of acts that people might consider "bad" or "wrong", the monetary and social costs of enforcement would far outweigh the negative effects of the thing you want to prohibit.

Expand full comment
19 more comments...

No posts