"Discrimination" is not a derogatory term.

I recently read Xue Zhaofeng's lectures on economics. Familiar economic concepts are explained in simple terms by Shi Xue, and the examples in the book are vivid and grounded, which is really interesting.

What is the essence of discrimination? Everyone thinks that discrimination is a derogatory term, but in economics, discrimination = differential treatment is a completely neutral term.

Why is there discrimination? Because resources are always scarce. Based on the scarcity of resources, we can only do limited things. If we do a thing and the resources are not enough to do b thing, we must choose. If you choose to do thing A, then thing B will be discriminated against-or treated differently.

Shi Xue gave a simple example: "When I married my wife, I also made a choice. When I married her, I discriminated against other women in the world and other men in the world, because now some countries can also marry the same sex. Although I want to treat everyone equally, the law does not allow me to do so. "

Another example is that my time is limited, and I will spend 2 hours in the evening after work. If I choose to read books, I will not be able to associate with my friends or go out for a walk with my parents. If you choose to go out for a walk with your parents, you will not be able to read and socialize. In this example, if you choose to study, you will discriminate against your parents and friends-you don't need to feel uncomfortable. The "discrimination" here is not derogatory, but simply "no choice". Discrimination is inevitable, and the root cause is that resources (mainly time resources here) are too scarce-if you have six hours of spare time after work, you can easily do reading, socializing and walking without making a choice.

So, what is the basis of discrimination (or differential treatment)? Shi Xue thinks the first is preference. For example, if someone likes Faye Wong's songs and has 50 yuan, he will decide to buy Faye Wong's records instead of other singers' records. The second is information asymmetry. In the face of tigers, people will choose to run at once, instead of carefully knowing whether tigers eat people before deciding whether to run, because the information here is seriously asymmetric (we don't know tigers' hobbies) and the cost is too high (the cost is our own life).

The reason is really simple, but based on this, it is easy to have a rational understanding of many phenomena in daily life. For example, why is there gender discrimination in the workplace, and why is there age and geographical discrimination in life? It's not that HR doesn't know that there are women with strong working ability, nor that the public doesn't know that judging people by region, age or even constellation is simple and rude. Many times, it is only because the information is not symmetrical enough, or the cost of understanding/screening outstanding individuals is too high (perhaps time cost, energy cost, etc.). ), in order to save costs, they directly judge by generalizability.

This is not to defend irrational behaviors such as gender discrimination, age discrimination and geographical discrimination. In fact, people who make such "discrimination" actions have to pay the price themselves. "Generalization (discrimination) can give us some initial impressions at the lowest cost, but wrong discrimination may cost a lot ... The more serious the consequences of discrimination, the more motivated people are to reduce discrimination. If the consequences of discrimination are not serious, people will discriminate against others casually. "

Therefore, in a relatively closed small group, or when making some unimportant decisions, if we make simple and rude judgments based on the inherent impression and treat the objects differently, the consequences will not be very serious. However, if we still discriminate in a general way in an environment of fierce market competition or strong personnel/affairs diversity, the consequences will be much more serious. Accordingly, discrimination in the latter environment will be much reduced. For example, it is normal to crowd out a person because he is a foreigner in a small village, but it is a miracle in large enterprises in first-tier cities such as Beishangguangshen and Shenzhen, because if all foreigners are crowded out, locals will also pay a serious price, and the task may not be completed, or even the whole enterprise will not run.

(The main point of this paper is quoted from lecture No.009-011in Xue Zhaofeng Economics Lecture Notes).