View Poll Results: What is your proposal?

Voters
57. You may not vote on this poll
  • $100 to me, $0 to player B

    4 7.02%
  • $99 to me, $1 to player B

    3 5.26%
  • $90 to me, $10 to player B

    1 1.75%
  • $80 to me, $20 to player B

    1 1.75%
  • $70 to me, $30 to player B

    2 3.51%
  • $60 to me, $40 to player B

    7 12.28%
  • $50 to me, $50 to player B

    36 63.16%
  • $40 to me, $60 to player B

    3 5.26%
  • $30 to me, $70 to player B

    0 0%
  • $20 or less to me, $80 or more to player B

    0 0%
Page 3 of 14 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 134

Thread: Hypothetical: $100 Game

  1. #21
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by Panache View Post
    All I am assuming is the the players are human. Since there is a strong potential for player B to turn down $1 out of spite, even if you only play once, and you have had no prior contact with player B, you have to offer him more than you would if you knew that he would act so called "rationally."

    If everyone acted "rationally" you could just offer him $1 and keep $99 for yourself.

    It seems to me then that being an "irrational" creature is more likely to maximize your expected value than being a "rational" creature, since the "rational" creature would only get $1 and the "irrational" creature gets substantially more. Accordingly it seems more rational to me to be the "irrational" creature.
    I completely agree that it's rational for Player A to offer more than $1 to the other player; it's rational to assume the other player's irrationality. I just disagree with your assertion that if you were Player B, that it would be economically rational to decline $1. That's not the case unless you're going to be interacting with this person again in the future, which the scenario did not indicate.
    Last edited by Kandahar; 06-14-10 at 05:12 AM.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  2. #22
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    No. Milton Friedman and the monetarists were a part of standard economics, but I wasn't referring specifically to them. Most of the Keynesians fall under the standard economics banner as well, as do the supply-siders.
    Got yea, they sound like a fringe element.
    To me, anyone who thinks than an economy, could be completely mathematically efficient, would be crazy.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    I think there are far too many examples of people behaving irrationally, even in the aggregate, for this to be a general axiom. At most, I might accept the idea that aggregations of people are better than individual experts in certain key areas of economics, like stock pricing...but even that is questionable IMO.
    In strict terms of dollars and cents, I believe you're right.
    Thinking in terms of the personal value of non physical things, like emotions, I believe people to generally be rational in their actions.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    It's amazing how people will contort reality to match their mathematical theories, rather than designing theories to match reality.
    That's terrible from a learning standpoint, they sound very close minded.
    I've came to the conclusion, that perfection in an economy is the imperfections of people.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  3. #23
    Irrelevant Pissant

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Last Seen
    03-13-14 @ 07:55 PM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    4,194

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    I completely agree that it's rational for Player A to offer more than $1 to the other player; it's rational to assume the other player's irrationality. I just disagree with your assertion that if you were Player B, that it would be economically rational to decline $1. That's not the case unless you're going to be interacting with this person again in the future, which the scenario did not indicate.
    You don't need to interact with them again for it to be rational, you just have to assume that neither of you exist in a vacuum. If they tell their friend, who in turn tells another friend, who observed the same phenomena from someone else who acted similarly "irrationally" then it makes the possibility of an "irrational" refusal an issue for Player A to consider. If none of the players B ever refuse the money out of spite, then it would be irrational for player A to plan for such. The only thing that makes it rational to assume that player B will behave "irrationally" is the fact that they are a member of a group that has a history of behaving "irrationally".

    Given that the "irrational" behavior of the group has led to a much higher gain compared to a group that always behaved "rationally," the "irrational" behavior seems to only be irrational in the short term, but more rational in the long term.

  4. #24
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    I think the point he's making Panache that, in regards to the game and the information provided, you are essentially in a vacuum

  5. #25
    Sage
    Infinite Chaos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Last Seen
    11-19-17 @ 06:45 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    14,858

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    50/50 is more than fair.

    Of course if B refuses, I kick him in the nuts. If I am B and A offers less, I kick him in the nuts.

    So in conclusion if I get nothing, someone gets kicked in the nuts.
    I certainly wouldn't agree to be player "B" for any of you lot - and it looks like Blackdog is itching to kick anybody in the nuts but he's made the best offer (excluding physical violence).

    I don't know much about economics but I'd go for the most profitable amount (to me) least likely to get a rejection from Player B whereby we'd both lose.

  6. #26
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    If I was player A, I'd offer 51/49. (it wasn't an option so I picked 50/50 in the poll)

    If I was player B, I'd reject any off that was not 50/50 or better for me (even if the person offered what I would offer).

    My rationale:

    I don't really care about the sum of money involved, so it's all about winning the game. Winning the game for player A is getting player B to accept any offer that benefits Player A more. A 50/50 split is a "loss" for player A. A rejection is a loss for Player A.

    Winning the game for Player B is getting at least $50 or rejecting it. Accepting less than $50 is a loss for Player B.

    So the offer I would give as Player A would be the offer that has the greatest chance of earning me a "win" as Player A.

    The only offers I'd accept as player B would be one's where I "win" or else I will exercise my option to snatch the win away from Player A.


    If the sum being divided were something substantial, the threshold for me to accept a "loss" in the game would be when the amount of money I could win was large enough that I was willing to lose the game. Let's say that it was $10,000 being divided instead of 100.

    I'd gladly accept a 9,000/1,000 split because the "consolation" prize is enough to make losing worth it. If I were player A in such a scenario, I would size up Player B in order to determine what I should offer. If they look like they wouldn't care too much about $1,000, I'd offer a more fair split. If they look like a normal person, I'd offer 9,000/1,000.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

  7. #27
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Ft. Campbell, KY
    Last Seen
    12-31-14 @ 08:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    12,177

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    I think the poll, although its just 11 people, but I could say 78% to sound more convincing, shows a trend towards a social norm of fairness. That is, its not right to take advantage of someone in a poor or powerless situation, such as under pure logic being forced to accept a single dollar while you take 99.

    The 50/50 splits is equal and leaves the deciding party without a sense of guilt or shame in having taken advantage of a situation where they were placed as the decider purely by chance, and I believe there's an underlying agreement that people expect from one another for fairness. Also consider that not feeling the sense of guilt may be more valuable to the decider than an extra 49 bucks. Thats the problem I see with a lot of economic theory, it ignores things it can't quantify, like "feelings," or even worse actually tries to quantify them.

  8. #28
    free market communist
    Gardener's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Last Seen
    09-30-17 @ 12:27 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    26,661

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    I would offer 50/50 split because the potential animosity created were I to be greedier outweighs the difference between 50 dollars and whatever other amount I might suggest.
    "you're better off on Stormfront discussing how evil brown men are taking innocent white flowers." Infinite Chaos

  9. #29
    Goddess of Bacon

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Last Seen
    05-28-12 @ 09:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    13,988

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    I'd say 50/50 cause that's how I roll. Unless I thought Player B really needed the money much more than me, in which case I'd say 1/99

  10. #30
    Matthew 16:3

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Everywhere and nowhere
    Last Seen
    06-24-17 @ 05:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    45,603

    Re: Hypothetical: $100 Game

    Quote Originally Posted by rivrrat View Post
    Unless I thought Player B really needed the money much more than me, in which case I'd say 1/99
    Good point. If player B looked like $100 dollars was a big deal for them, I'd probably do the same,


    If it was reversed and I was player B and Player A looked like they really needed the money, I'd accept any offer and give them my portion afterward.
    Tucker Case - Tard magnet.

Page 3 of 14 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •