Re: The Cigarette Standard
What I'm curious about is, would a sin-tax on cigs have the same effect
as, say, high interest rates on the dollar? If it's harder to borrow
cigarettes because the borrowing cost is higher, does the value of a
purchased cig become higher due to its scarcity in the money system?
jonathan
On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, Michael Giesbrecht wrote:
Has anybody studied how well cigarettes work as a monetary standard in US prisons?
From what I've been led to believe, cigarettes are universally used to facilitate
commerce in a prison economy. It seems like the cigarette is everything a good solid
currency needs to be, at least within a prison's confines.
Cheers,
Michael Giesbrecht
Internet Engineering
Lucasfilm Ltd.
I'm here for the beer. - (attributed to) John Locke
--
Jonathan KalbfeldM2686]U('!L87D=AIR!M ThoughtWave Technologies LLC
(v) +1 415 386 UNIX 97-S86=E()A8VMW87)DRP: UNIX, Networking, Programming
Cost vs. Price or Flatland
I recently obtained my series 7 license, but during the six weeks of
studying, a great deal of my material involved economic impact of various
fiscal and monetary policy, and also of course the laws of compounding
interest.
I think I figured out the problem with society today. Business prays on
countless individuals who can not distinguish the difference between cost
and price. Of course there's no need to define those terms on here, but
it occurred to me that while I can spend $250 on a plane ticket now, I
will have paid $225,000 for that plane ticket by the time I am dead.
This has become a very big problem for me, because I don't want to spend
any money. Not one red cent. I don't enjoy anything because all I can
see any more is opportunity cost. I have gotten to the point in my life
where I can't enjoy anything--probably not even a weekend in Hawaii
because I see it as a missed investment opportunity.
I look at every single bargain or sale with the eyes of a skeptic,
knowing that the counter-party in the transaction must have a reason for
what they are doing. They must see this item as worth less than what they
are selling it for so why should I buy it for the sale price?
I feel much like the main character of Flatland who is suddenly bumped
into the third dimension by a strange object, gets catapulted above the
normal 2-dimensional plane, and can never look at his world the same way.
Does anyone else feel like this?
jonathan
--
Jonathan KalbfeldM2686]U('!L87D=AIR!M ThoughtWave Technologies LLC
(v) +1 415 386 UNIX 97-S86=E()A8VMW87)DRP: UNIX, Networking, Programming
Re: Cost vs. Price or Flatland
--- Jonathan Kalbfeld [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... Business prays on countless individuals who can not distinguish the difference between cost and price. You mean pray as in to implore and beseech, saying I pray you buy my product? Or do you mean prey as in predation? If the latter, this implies force, and only government and criminals use force, not business qua business. Fred Foldvary = [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Cost vs. Price or Flatland
Suppose I can spend $10 on a widget that I want or
invest the $10 at the best possible rate. The
invested money will grow to, let's say, $100 in some
period of time. But that $10 isn't worth $100 today,
it's only worth $10 today. The widget and the
investment have the same** value today, right? Even
though I won't be able to resell the widget for $100
in the future, I do get the use of the widget, as
opposed to my invested $10 which doesn't do anything
for me until I cash it in. So the $225,000 you could
obtain on your death-bed is only worth $250 today, the
same as the plane ticket. And if you buy the ticket,
you get to go to Hawaii, to boot. That's not to say
that one shouldn't plan for the future, but one
shouldn't sell out the present for the benefit of the
future, either.
If someone is willing to make a bet with you, you
should wonder if maybe she knows something you don't.
I don't think the same is true with sales bargains.
Hal Varian briefly mentions his theory of sales in
this paper: www.sims.berkeley.edu/~hal/Papers/how.pdf
. I don't have the resources to locate the Theory of
Sales paper itself.
--jsh
**Okay, okay. They won't have the same value if I'm
not the marginal purchaser, or whatever.
--- Jonathan Kalbfeld [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I recently obtained my series 7 license, but during
the six weeks of
studying, a great deal of my material involved
economic impact of various
fiscal and monetary policy, and also of course the
laws of compounding
interest.
I think I figured out the problem with society
today. Business prays on
countless individuals who can not distinguish the
difference between cost
and price. Of course there's no need to define
those terms on here, but
it occurred to me that while I can spend $250 on a
plane ticket now, I
will have paid $225,000 for that plane ticket by the
time I am dead.
This has become a very big problem for me, because I
don't want to spend
any money. Not one red cent. I don't enjoy
anything because all I can
see any more is opportunity cost. I have gotten to
the point in my life
where I can't enjoy anything--probably not even a
weekend in Hawaii
because I see it as a missed investment opportunity.
I look at every single bargain or sale with the
eyes of a skeptic,
knowing that the counter-party in the transaction
must have a reason for
what they are doing. They must see this item as
worth less than what they
are selling it for so why should I buy it for the
sale price?
I feel much like the main character of Flatland who
is suddenly bumped
into the third dimension by a strange object, gets
catapulted above the
normal 2-dimensional plane, and can never look at
his world the same way.
Does anyone else feel like this?
jonathan
--
Jonathan KalbfeldM268@6]U('!L87D@=AIR!M
ThoughtWave Technologies LLC
(v) +1 415 386 UNIX 97-S86=E()A8VMW87)DRP@:
UNIX, Networking, Programming
__
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site
http://webhosting.yahoo.com
Re: Incentives
Psychologists have conducted experiments where the subjects are (randomly) split into two categories. They both perform the same task, perhaps a memory drill, and then one group gets paid money for participating and the other doesn't. After the experiment, i.e. the task that the subjects were told was the experiment, the subjects are interviewed. One of the questions asks how much they enjoyed the experiment. Subjects who were paid money enjoy the task significantly less than those who aren't. The theory behind this is that when a person does the task, their mind needs a reason to avoid cognitive dissonance. When they are paid, the money acts as the reason; when they aren't paid, enjoying the task acts as the reason. To put another way, one's mind imposes enjoyment ex post, so that it doesn't have to cope with the disconnect of doing something for no good reason and disliking doing it. Hazing rituals are supposed to perform a similar function. If one puts up with the hazing, it must be for a good reason. Therefore, the group that does the hazing, the frat, military academy, or whatever, is seen in a better light to avoid the cognitive dissonance. Don't judge this theory based on my explanation of it. As I've noted before, I'm a clumsy writer at best. But that is the theory as I recall it. Whether grades fit the theory, I haven't a clue. Hope that helps, -jsh --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The following appeared in an article on grade inflation in the Chronicle of Higher Education: Grades motivate (a fallacy according to the article). With the exception of orthodox behaviorists, psychologists have come to realize that people can exhibit qualitatively different kinds of motivation: intrinsic, in which the task itself is seen as valuable, and extrinsic, in which the task is just a means to the end of gaining a reward or escaping a punishment. The two are not only distinct but often inversely related. Scores of studies have demonstrated, for example, that the more people are rewarded, the more they come to lose interest in whatever had to be done in order to get the reward. (That conclusion is essentially reaffirmed by the latest major meta-analysis on the topic: a review of 128 studies, published in 1999 by Edward L. Deci, Richard Koestner, and Richard Ryan.) Is anyone on the list familiar with this literature? It sounds like they are saying that incentives don't matter. Cyril Morong __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site http://webhosting.yahoo.com
Re: Cost vs. Price or Flatland
On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, john hull wrote: If someone is willing to make a bet with you, you should wonder if maybe she knows something you don't. If you really want to get paranoid about everything you do, read the lit on the Winner's Curse. In the limit, only the most overoptimistic of people bother getting out of bed in the morning : Eric
Re: Incentives
I enjoyed Alfie Kohn's book Punished by Rewards, which is a popularization of much of this research. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0618001816/qid=1037396034/sr=8-1/ref=sr_8_1/104-2976940-3732712?v=glances=booksn=507846 I haven't read them yet, but Deci and Dweck seem to be a couple of the principal researches in the effects of external rewards on intrinsic motivation. Why We Do What We Do: Understanding Self-Motivation Edward L. Deci, Richard Flaste http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0140255265/ref=pd_bxgy_text_1/104-2976940-3732712?v=glances=books Self-theories: Their Role in Motivation, Personality, and Development (Essays in Social Psychology) Carol S. Dweck http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1841690244/qid=/sr=/ref=cm_lm_asin/104-2976940-3732712?v=glance Chris john hull wrote: Psychologists have conducted experiments where the subjects are (randomly) split into two categories. They both perform the same task, perhaps a memory drill, and then one group gets paid money for participating and the other doesn't. After the experiment, i.e. the task that the subjects were told was the experiment, the subjects are interviewed. One of the questions asks how much they enjoyed the experiment. Subjects who were paid money enjoy the task significantly less than those who aren't. The theory behind this is that when a person does the task, their mind needs a reason to avoid cognitive dissonance. When they are paid, the money acts as the reason; when they aren't paid, enjoying the task acts as the reason. To put another way, one's mind imposes enjoyment ex post, so that it doesn't have to cope with the disconnect of doing something for no good reason and disliking doing it. Hazing rituals are supposed to perform a similar function. If one puts up with the hazing, it must be for a good reason. Therefore, the group that does the hazing, the frat, military academy, or whatever, is seen in a better light to avoid the cognitive dissonance. Don't judge this theory based on my explanation of it. As I've noted before, I'm a clumsy writer at best. But that is the theory as I recall it. Whether grades fit the theory, I haven't a clue. Hope that helps, -jsh --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The following appeared in an article on grade inflation in the Chronicle of Higher Education: Grades motivate (a fallacy according to the article). With the exception of orthodox behaviorists, psychologists have come to realize that people can exhibit qualitatively different kinds of motivation: intrinsic, in which the task itself is seen as valuable, and extrinsic, in which the task is just a means to the end of gaining a reward or escaping a punishment. The two are not only distinct but often inversely related. Scores of studies have demonstrated, for example, that the more people are rewarded, the more they come to lose interest in whatever had to be done in order to get the reward. (That conclusion is essentially reaffirmed by the latest major meta-analysis on the topic: a review of 128 studies, published in 1999 by Edward L. Deci, Richard Koestner, and Richard Ryan.) Is anyone on the list familiar with this literature? It sounds like they are saying that incentives don't matter. Cyril Morong __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your site http://webhosting.yahoo.com
