Kevin, isn't this just a more refined method for computing the benefit side of a cost-benefit analysis? A good thing for sure, but not necessarily that much different from what most policy shops do now. Plus, I'd like to see some caution with the projection of results from current populations based on prior results. Better to see a range of outcomes, low to high, allowing for the vagaries of human experience. I think that would add some credibility to the projections. When one sees returns quantified down to the penny, it occasions some skepticism. A little predictive humility would be more convincing.
Kevin, isn't this just a more refined method for computing the benefit side of a cost-benefit analysis? A good thing for sure, but not necessarily that much different from what most policy shops do now. Plus, I'd like to see some caution with the projection of results from current populations based on prior results. Better to see a range of outcomes, low to high, allowing for the vagaries of human experience. I think that would add some credibility to the projections. When one sees returns quantified down to the penny, it occasions some skepticism. A little predictive humility would be more convincing.