You're missing the point. Of course it is being wasted, and it's a suboptimal result to spend the money on the lottery. It's just that the perceived utility of that marginal benefit is lower than classical economics might think.Originally Posted by RandBlade
I asked it first.
So the perceived marginal utility of having food, electricity, heat or rent is low?
I think he's saying that for many people the perceived marginal utility of having an extra 0.05*(very little) to spend on food/electricity/heat/rent this week is relatively low.
"One day, we shall die. All the other days, we shall live."
Must has missed that. I stopped following the thread for a bit after you justified your baseless claims with a version of "because I said so"
Yes. (Though Minx's rephrasing might be somewhat closer to my thrust.) Their marginal utility should be much higher than me or you since they're starting off with so much less, but instead they squander that 5% on frippery that won't give them much actual utility. The explanation being mooted is that our classical understanding of marginal utility is flipped on its head here due to this psychological 'bee sting' effect.
This excerpt from Karelis' article "Poverty and wealth, by this logic, don't just fall along a continuum the way hot and cold or short and tall do. They are instead fundamentally different experiences, each working on the human psyche in its own way. At some point between the two, people stop thinking in terms of goods and start thinking in terms of problems, and that shift has enormous consequences. Perhaps because economists, by and large, are well-off, he suggests, they've failed to see the shift at all." reminds of something I was once told. That there are two problems with money: you can have too much, or too little, but not enough. Those with too much are always worried that someone is trying to take it from them. while those with too little are worried about getting it. Two distinctly different mind-sets. Even while those with proverbially too much money are still trying to get more, their worry level about it is much lower compared to those with too little. Neither is able to understand the other's position. Not because they are seeing the problem differently, but because they are looking at different problems.
The worst job in the world is better than being broke and homeless
People by in large are people, a rich person born under similar circumstances as a poor person would behave in a very similar fashion. Meaning the term stupid is misplaced. Also your reasons don't hold enough explanatory power to have a real impact on why a poor person remains poor. First we can take the large percentage of poor not participating in those things listed. Secondly, a lot of these people really lack knowledge, lack a hopeful vision they just live day to day week to week, and that's life. They don't expect to get a better job than what they have, and perhaps they can't. I firmly believe there is a lot of untapped potential in all people, and that the vast majority with the right guidance can do a lot more than what they do, both in intellectual and physical abilities.
Last edited by Lebanese Dragon; 02-08-2011 at 04:53 PM.
Does not compute. I seriously doubt people with "more then enough money" are spending their days someone is going to steal it all.
Really? They don't feel overtaxed, don't actually spend money to lobby for tax breaks for the rich? They don't spend time finding ways to hide it from the govt., hackers,gold-digging bimbos, et al? They feel like everyone, even other richies, are after their money. That really does not compute? There are more ways to feel robbed than having a gun in your face y'know.
The worst job in the world is better than being broke and homeless
I'm not rich and I feel overtaxed. I take the proper measure to avoid identity theft. Many people hire tax prep companies in order to find ways of paying the least amount they possibly can.
Are you really trying to limit these feelings and precautions to the rich, and those with "more than enough money?"
And what of the Poor who get sick, or shot in the head? Do they keep themselves down, or is our system set up to give preferential treatment to certain people and scraps to everyone else?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41315890/ns/us_news/Giffords' rehab fully covered, but not so for other victims of brain injury
I'd like to know how character bootstraps, or charity, can possibly fill these kinds of income class disparities.
No, he's illustrating those people can have those feelings, in reply to a statement Lewk made that may imply that they don't.
. . .
On this whole buying lottery tickets it depends on your situation you guys are just looking at the long run gain for a given person, and how statically it doesn't pay off. That's fine but for those living in the short run it can be a useful recourse, if you need 50k to give to the mafia or they're going to kill you, and u need it now, and the lottery is tommorrow there is no other viable way, yes i'm going to buy these tickets. Or if you live life with no hope, or knowledge of alternatives to elevate yourself and 1 dollar a month is niether going to signficantly improve or hurt your abiliity to live, and you no better recourse to invest your money then it could be worthwhile.
Granted if we lived forever and they wanted to save taht dollar then eventually those people that did so would recieve the higher pay off on average.
Who knows maybe it works out for the best because that same money is just added to what's used to help those improverished out. I still think we can do a lot more, tap into the potential and energy of the elderly, get them involved in various tasks, counciling, knitting for those impoverished, handing out soup in soup kitches, managing local voting booths, helping to organize perhaps city events. I think a lot of non-physically intensive tasks they could be doing, instead of being bored all day themselves, adn being a source of wasted energy and talent. I beleive this of many untapped groups.
I think we coudl pair older kids in schools with younger kids in schools to help teach them mathematics and other material on a one on one buddy system which will help the kids teaching as they have to thoroughly be able to answer different aspects of the material and recall them correctly (great reinforcement), and help the developing kids with the one on one experience with their peers. A lot of things we don't do because we're not well organized as a society, there is a lot of social innovations that need to be made.
Except I do the majority of the things he mentioned, (any intelligent person would) yet I would hardly say I spend my days worrying about my precious monies being spirited away. Do you think most wealthy people do, or rather do you think they do so more than your average person?
I never calimed that those with too little money don't worry about losing what precious little they do have. Though it usually doesn't last long enough to worry about. Lewk implied that the rich do not worry about people trying to steal their money, I was simply rebutting that implication. It is, of course, wise to be cautious with regard to whatever resources you have.
Conversely, the poor are not the only ones who try to aquire more than they currently have. Hence the rich getting richer, or the more you have the more you want, and such.
The worst job in the world is better than being broke and homeless
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote