Robert Book wrote:
>I think we are leaving something out here.  Many people, or at least
>many Americans, seem highly offended at the notion of having to pay to
>use a toilet.  ... such people have a strong disutility
>associated with paying for the toilet, to the point that they are
>willing to pay a little extra for the goods sold at the establishment.

Plausible, but then the question is: *why* do people have a disutility
of paying for toilets?  Does this fit into any pattern of the sorts
of things people have a disutility of paying for?

Tim James wrote:
>Probably because of what some Burger King guy called the "veto-vote."
>Let's say you have a group of four or five people, and one has to use the
>bathroom.  They are in an area with a McD's and a Burger King, but the
>McDonalds charges $0.25 to use the facilities.  Burger King, on the other
>hand, is free.  Which are they more likely to stop at?  BK.  And the other
>four people are likely to buy some fries, a soda, whatever.

A creative suggestion, but it seems to require a correlation between people
who don't want to eat and people who want to use the bathroom.  That sort
of correlation is what makes your veggie burger example work.

Robin Hanson  [EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://hanson.gmu.edu
Asst. Prof. Economics, George Mason University
MSN 1D3, Carow Hall, Fairfax VA 22030-4444
703-993-2326  FAX: 703-993-2323

Reply via email to