Being transported from 2010 to 1700 isn’t the same as being born in 1700.
Your formulation of the question sounds unintuitive to me. We could ask a simpler question: would you rather live one life starting 2010, or two lives starting 1700?
Also you could try applying your technique to comparing the welfare of different countries right now. Many of the problems you listed will be easier to overcome.
Also you could try applying your technique to comparing the welfare of different countries right now. Many of the problems you listed will be easier to overcome.
This also has the advantage that we actually know how to transport someone to another country. If someone wanted to put resources into this, they could ask people to actually make the choice, not just imagine what choice they would make.
Unless you speak that country’s language natively, have social network there etc. this is just at all comparable in real world. It would still be just a thought experiment.
Though if you look at willingness of people to take the bets moving in both directions, you may be able to account for it. For example (ignoring bilinguals for simplicity), if in England most people don’t speak French, so they are less willing to move to France, and in France most people don’t speak english, so they are less willing to move to England, maybe the effect cancels out, if both are equally represented.
Though, the experiment seems overly elaborate. We can look at immigration rates, and costs of immigration people are willing pay.
Being transported from 2010 to 1700 isn’t the same as being born in 1700.
Your formulation of the question sounds unintuitive to me. We could ask a simpler question: would you rather live one life starting 2010, or two lives starting 1700?
Also you could try applying your technique to comparing the welfare of different countries right now. Many of the problems you listed will be easier to overcome.
This also has the advantage that we actually know how to transport someone to another country. If someone wanted to put resources into this, they could ask people to actually make the choice, not just imagine what choice they would make.
Unless you speak that country’s language natively, have social network there etc. this is just at all comparable in real world. It would still be just a thought experiment.
You are right, those are confounding factors.
Though if you look at willingness of people to take the bets moving in both directions, you may be able to account for it. For example (ignoring bilinguals for simplicity), if in England most people don’t speak French, so they are less willing to move to France, and in France most people don’t speak english, so they are less willing to move to England, maybe the effect cancels out, if both are equally represented.
Though, the experiment seems overly elaborate. We can look at immigration rates, and costs of immigration people are willing pay.