|
|
|
|
|
|
by mattkrause
2931 days ago
|
|
|
Yes. And when a program's benefits outweigh its costs, it seems weird to say that the program is a damper on economic activity. In other words, if Option A is "get zero dollars", and Option B is "spend $1 to get $2", it is unfair to complain about B's "cost" (spending $1) in isolation. |
|
|