Comments on: Why People Have Irrational Beliefs About Money

By: Fo Reals

Fo Reals — Wed, 09 Apr 2008 03:46:40 +0000

I think that if people were really honest with themselves, they would choose to make more than their neighbors.
It sounds bad, so it is easy to debate. But secretly, don’t you just want to be a little bit better than the guy across the street?

By: Alex

Alex — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 08:33:07 +0000

Ah, classic Interweb phenomenon: oversimplify a complex question and overthink a simple one. Then go on a tangent.

If we wait long enough, Jesus and his godisimaginary link spam (deleted now) will show up….

By: ted

ted — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 04:00:23 +0000

Pedants.

By: donna

donna — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 01:45:00 +0000

Depends. What would I be doing for the money?

The other problem with money is thinking only in terms of money, and not valuing your time….

By: VonSkippy

VonSkippy — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 21:56:22 +0000

All of this is very complex, perhaps if people would send me some money it would help clear up some of these confusing topics.

//sorry, thought this was the thread about scammers.

By: biltmore

biltmore — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 19:55:36 +0000

@ Michael – “When making economic analysis, be sure to include values for less tangible goods, like vagina.”

LOL!

By: LV

LV — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 18:43:57 +0000

lets see make twice as much as everybody else, or half as much as everybody else. can i think about this for a moment? the majority of people chose to make half as much.who are these people?

By: G.

G. — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 17:33:50 +0000

You have to wonder, who are they using to represent this research? I immediately thought it was a nonsensical question. But then I’ve also seen the people who ask the random statistical questions like these. They’re always catching people who have other things on their minds. Is this really representative?

Aren’t statistics sort of like this question? A comparison but of what? Those numbers always change and it’s crazy to think people make solid decisions based on surveys and controlled groups that “represent the masses”.

By: Terry Austin

Terry Austin — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:24:11 +0000

The assumption that prices would stay the same makes it a trick question. And trick questions never give useful scientific data. Because we’re hard wired to live in the real world, and in the real world, if you make less than *everyone else*, you don’t live as well. Prices *won’t* stay the same.

By: Michael

Michael — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 16:09:16 +0000

Yes, but some would rather be a King of Spades than a 10 of Diamonds.

By: Sid Morrison

Sid Morrison — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 13:18:35 +0000

This is an excellent example.

@Economist — The example clearly states to ASSUME THAT PRICES REMAIN THE SAME. Yes, this is an simplification, but it is reasonable especially when we are considering what is happening with our neighbors, coworkers, &c. One could also have given the example in “real” dollars (inflation adjusted), rather than “nominal” dollars, but that makes it harder for non-economists to grasp. Just get past that, OK and consider what the example is really talking about.

The results observed is purely one of socialist conditioning. People are (regrettably) trained to be very concerned about the irrelevent “growing gap between rich and poor” when in reality, everyone’s standard of living is (usually) increasing. This is all that matters. If your family could never have afforded a Yugo 20 years earlier and now you drive a pretty decent Chevy, you shouldn’t really be worried that the guy across town has a Mercedes. So what

People should be concerned when standards of living drop, not when so-called “gaps” widen. The poor in the Western world are gobs better off than the middle class were in their grandparents’ era.

By: Michael

Michael — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 13:09:24 +0000

When making economic analysis, be sure to include values for less tangible goods, like vagina.

By: Frank

Frank — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 12:37:34 +0000

I too would choose the first option thinking that prices surly would be different when most people would earn less than me. As stated befire: When prices stayed the same i would choose option number two.

By: Economist

Economist — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 10:31:40 +0000

Prices would necessarily rise, though, since the total amount of money in circulation would rise, thus creating inflation.

By: jack.wh

jack.wh — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:15:31 +0000

As Geekazoid said, it’s about comparing yourself to others, which is why most people would go for the first option (to make themselves look better against others). But If prices were staying the same I’d go for 100,000.

By: Geekazoid

Geekazoid — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 08:47:17 +0000

Not me, if prices and goods were same, etc., then for sure I’d go for the 100,000. My concern is not what others are making, nor comparing myself to others, but what I can make for myself. There will always be people making more and less than me, so they are not my concern.