Taking it to the extreme

Less than three months before the 2022 general elections, the Hungarian government fixed the price of six food items and required shops to keep a minimum stock of each.

Instead of going into why it's an atrocious idea aimed at gaining votes (fixing the price of utilities before the 2014 general elections had worked for them, so they know), I want to write about a method that can help you gain valuable insights.

I call it "taking it to the extreme."

Using the leading example, if a government can fix the price of some goods and services, why can't it do the same for all of them? What would be the consequences if it did? Wouldn't it be great if prices didn't rise?

If a $15 minimum wage is a good idea, what about a $30 one or a $100 one? At one point, this will seem ludicrous, but why? Why at that point? How do you know at what point does it become that? Does it tell you something about the original proposition?

Why does the government need to collect taxes where they can print money at will? If the government can print 5% more money each year, why not 10% or 50% more? (The latter went from an exaggerated, theoretical example to reality in 2020-2021).

Granted, there aren't many insights to gain from thinking, "If I eat an apple and feel great, what if I ate two? What about 10?" — and you can simply check. The method is way more practical when thinking about abstract concepts, but those are the ones worth thinking about, so that's fine.

I'm not saying you'll always learn something when taking it to the extreme, but you will more often than not. I've discovered many truths that way, and I hope you will, too.

(Originally written on Jan 18th, 2022.)