Cost to whom? Imagine all the lost revenue if people would have a rational basis to trust each other more. Less transactions due to more informal exchanges must mean lost revenue to someone.
To make it short : Money and time lost due this lack of trust could be allocated to more valuable endeavor, such as pretty much anything.
Therefore it is better for society to solve this issue, even if it means some specific people that were making money out of it beforehand will not be able to anymore.
I guess it means less work for lawyers. The sarcastic reply is that lawyers don't need more money. The more serious reply is that the work a lawyer does doesn't increase the "value output" (I don't know the formal term) the same way that an engineer or researcher or teacher does. A lawyer, like an economist, helps grease the transactions of a society, but if society is already greased, the lawyer could be doing something directly "useful".
Inefficiencies present a net cost to society. In low trust environments, you see more generalism (fewer people to trust) and more nepotism (there's a social cost to cheating family members, so family members can be more trusted).
Majestic121|5 years ago
To make it short : Money and time lost due this lack of trust could be allocated to more valuable endeavor, such as pretty much anything.
Therefore it is better for society to solve this issue, even if it means some specific people that were making money out of it beforehand will not be able to anymore.
elgfare|5 years ago
aidenn0|5 years ago