Since our goal in #life is maximising {well-being, quality of life, happiness, flourishing, utility} both for us and in the universe as a whole (nobody sits at either extreme of that spectrum; ie nobody’s absolutely selfish or absolutely altruistic), I would like everybody to know about QALY’s and use them more often than they use dollars, hours or calories.
We all have internalised (imperfect) convertibility between time and money already: we routinely give away the former for the latter (work), or vice versa (outsourcing, entertainment, services). Less clear is the relationship between those two dimensions and others such as physical health, physical safety, mental health, power, fulfilment, transcendence, etc… and yet we know there is one — because if pressed we know how many € or weeks we’d trade in exchange for more of those (or vice versa).
Perhaps a robust and granular version of QALY is the most comprehensive and least biased unit with which to assess individual an collective decision-making.
Ultimately, everything you do, don’t do, consume, use, avoid or covet should work towards that goal of maximising your #wellbeing or the well-being of others, right? What better unit than “QALY” for that?
“Currency” carries too much psychological and ideological baggage, and it keeps the spotlight in one very specific dimension (ie, money).
“Time” is better, but it ignores the vital distinction between time spent and time well spent (remember: it’s “live long and prosper” not just “live long”).
I know it sounds far-fetched right now, but a much more refined definition of #QALY could be used to estimate the expected value of all products, habits and public policies — and to measure their impact in hindsight.
@tripu I fail to comprehend how a seperate measure could confer something useful.
Doing something like calculating environmental damage and adding it to the price of something would be useful, but works better with money - no conversions, just take what was necessary to repair the damage.
Just for measuring the benefit of a product, you would need context - someone starving would have a lot more benefit from any food than a person that is well fed to begin with.
And to measure the good for humanity as a whole, i would say we lack a concerted effort more than a system of measurement.
I suspect i may have misinterpreted qaly, if it becomes apparent in what way please tell me.