i'm no economist, so i won't pretend to understand it. my perception of this principle is rather simplistic, like this...
a tree drops 20 fruits a day, & if a man A collects all 20, he's gain is 100%. the next day, this tree drops another 20 fruits, but this time another man B joins A to collect them. if everything else being equal, each will collect 10, or 50% of the fruits.
assuming, each man only require 3 fruits a day to etch out a basic living, eg. 1 each for breakfast, lunch & dinner, then both should be happy because they would have their fill, plus 7 extra each as reserve. however, A might be discontented & felt hard done by, because he's so used to having all 20 fruits to himself ie. 3 for daily sustenance plus a massive 17 extra, but now his number has dropped 50%. even if a 3rd person joins in, each should still live comfortably with 6-7 fruits each.
now, imagine the men are doctors in private practice, the tree & fruits are the medical centre & patients, respectively. previously, Dr A gets to see & collect fees from all 20 patients. then Dr B joins the center & A's workload is immediately halved. but note, there is still more than enough patients for both doctors - 10 each, or 3 for sustenance & an additonal 7, for ....er...life's extras.
therefore, i can't comprehend why A, who :
1) has a working wife & grown up children,
2) lives in a bungalow & drives a 5-series,
3) collects rent from several other properties,
4) lectures part-time at university, &
5) professes faith in religion,
is throwing temper tantrums a month before B is scheduled to join the centre, considering the vast amount of fruits he has accumulated during the 10 years that he had monopoly in the practice??
this is how i see the law of diminishing returns operate in private practice. or, maybe it's just plain maths : same pie divided by more people ------> less share each.
but Paul saw it differently :
"For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. Some people, eager for money, have wandered from the faith and pierced themselves with many griefs." 1 Tim 6:10
Lord, lead me not unto temptation. Amen.
note : law of diminishing returns states that, in a production system with fixed and variable inputs (say factory size and labour), beyond some point, each additional unit of variable input yields less and less additional output. (source)
14 comments:
I know no maths! But, I like this -
Happiness multiplied when divided
Sorrows diminished when shared
Happy Malaysia Day. You say it's 50 years, I say it's 44 years. Read the History of "Maths" in my blog! Hard selling again!(grin*)
yan,
er...shouldn't it be the other way round??
i agree with your post on flying the flag. it has to be from the heart, not on cars, houses, & other inanimate, lifeless objects.
When I saw the title, memories of my Economics professor and lectures came into mind. Hehe.
Happy Merdeka!
;)
It could be like this. "A" has not learnt to derive contentment from having "little" and the more he "wants" and seeks to have, the more he seems to "need" to have contentment because a man's "WANTS "are never satisfied...so says Abraham Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.( economics model)
hi doc,
I am in private practice so I understand your post well. That's because I see it repeated again and again.
I do not think the law of deiminishing return can be applied in this situation. The laws states the returns diminishs as more effort is put into the work. This is not what private medical pratice is all about. Our limitation is how many patients we can serve a day effectively.
In private practice, the fear is that the pie or the cake become smaller as more doctors share it. Fortunately, from my experience, it is not so because the pie or cake gets bigger.
IMHO the underlying problem in your post which you have rightly pointed out is (1) the love of money, and (2) insecurity because of not trusting the Lord.
kyels,
hope you still can reproduce it in your exams, or better still, understand its principle in your personal & professional life.
just me,
it is I who need to learn econs after all. it is ironic that i almost moved to the econs-maths class (from bio-maths) in 6th form because i wasn't coping well with biology.
almost. on the verge of. but i'm glad i persisted.
hi alex,
the true meaning of the law doesn't apply in this case - i just used it for the "diminishing returns" part.
i have to say that the size of the pie maybe beyond the doctors' control, but in the worst-case scenario when the pie actually gets smaller, one just have to live one's life according to the income, even if that means having to eat...er...humble pie.
but so far, i have to concur, the pie invariably gets bigger.
Haiz my previous comment has disappeared. How can this be...
Now my brain is not functioning and I can only think of pie...
jonzz,
sorry , didn't receive any comment from you.
take the pie before only crumbs are left.
Depends on whether the pie is getting too big for one person to handle i guess. Or there's a niche to fill.
bernard,
it's just human nature to believe that the pie is never too big to share. everything reaches a balance in the end.
& life goes on.
pie too big also problem, surely you want to take wednesday off to play golf? but can't cos the patients DEMAND to see you.
Money is never enough for man.
las M,
if i have a day off, i'd like to go see a movie with the kids.
whether fortunately or not, i (almost) never have a patient demanding to see me. asking to see me, yes, but demanding? never!
Post a Comment