-
in other words a situation of laissez-faire,
-
leads to allocations that are Pareto efficient.
-
So they're in some sense good for the economy and good for the
-
society.
-
They don't maximize total welfare.
-
That's not even a well-defined thing as we saw last time
-
because how can you measure, how can you add one person's
-
utility to another.
-
It doesn't even make sense.
-
So economists at first were wrong to think of that as the
-
criterion for good allocations, but there's another better
-
definition of efficiency that Pareto invented,