tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6048425.post8904067228527049130..comments2023-11-02T15:32:15.417+00:00Comments on Bluematter.: Why do you want to be Rich?Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6048425.post-84826677551401960142010-02-15T21:18:53.128+00:002010-02-15T21:18:53.128+00:00purchasing power is king.purchasing power is king.financial directoryhttp://www.surf4finance.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6048425.post-25131541317767384732008-02-27T03:28:00.000+00:002008-02-27T03:28:00.000+00:00"your concerns about relative income have lead you..."your concerns about relative income have lead you not to strictly prefer an increase in your own income"<BR/><BR/>Not really. If my purchasing power isn't different in the two worlds (which is strange given nominal incomes go up between A and B but my share changes), then being indifferent between the worlds is exactly what you'd expect if someone only cares about absolute income levels.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6048425.post-82173189784731501482008-02-27T02:48:00.000+00:002008-02-27T02:48:00.000+00:00A bunch of us have been arguing about this same is...A bunch of us have been arguing about this same issue here:<BR/><BR/>http://tvhe.co.nz/2008/02/14/is-wanting-less-money-irrational/<BR/><BR/>It seems to boil down to the question of why people value relative wealth. <BR/><BR/>If we assume people are bounded rational - then it is possible that a preference for relative wealth evolved given the impact of relative wealth on the distribution of resources. <BR/><BR/>In this case, people will intrinsically value relative wealth simply because in most situations being richer than your neighbours implies having more resources - even if this specific example tried to bypass that by making a person imagine two entirely different situations.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6048425.post-1930648883647705652008-02-27T00:24:00.000+00:002008-02-27T00:24:00.000+00:00In the original survey I think they added 'assume ...In the original survey I think they added 'assume purchasing power is constant in both worlds'.<BR/><BR/>The fact that you are indifferent between the worlds also confirms my point: your concerns about relative income have lead you not to strictly prefer an increase in your own income.<BR/><BR/>Standard economic theory suggests you would always strictly prefer the option which leads to an increase in income.Rational Manhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16313026298774208746noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6048425.post-9161264960066307702008-02-26T23:47:00.000+00:002008-02-26T23:47:00.000+00:00Well, then I'm indifferent... Won't the way your ...Well, then I'm indifferent... Won't the way your asking the question confuse people? Or at least, your responses will confound the positional preference with the, apparent, increase in purchasing power.<BR/><BR/>There should be a way to ask the question such that the purchasing power issue goes away... I'm just not being creative enough right now to come up with such a clever rewording. :-)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6048425.post-60729696625281648442008-02-26T23:32:00.000+00:002008-02-26T23:32:00.000+00:00No, assume same purchasing powerNo, assume same purchasing powerRational Manhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16313026298774208746noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6048425.post-70416600449283679192008-02-26T23:06:00.000+00:002008-02-26T23:06:00.000+00:00Don't I have more purchasing power in the world A?...Don't I have more purchasing power in the world A?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com