Comments on: TED Videos: Ariely on Cheating, Gilbert on Value Miscalculation

By: Jim

Jim — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 16:50:27 +0000

I think his point about poverty and terror wasn’t that we are more able to fix poverty, but that poverty affects a greater number of people. We’ve spent a lot of money on combating terror and very little, relatively, on poverty.

I do think that the idea of choosing one or the other is ludicrous, you can work towards both and find a balance that meets your needs. I do agree that the fear of a terrorist attack is overblown compared to the statistics but I think being fearful is justified.

By: Luke

Luke — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 15:16:04 +0000

Good video, Jim.

It looks like a good way to identify problems. Unfortunately, identifying all factors and then giving them their level of importance is impossible to do, especially when you get into feelings, anticipation and other non-concrete things.

For example, his evident prioritization over poverty over terror. On the individual level, it is easy to prioritize poverty over terror, because we can actually make a difference in poverty through our money, time and talents.

On the governmental level, it becomes much a much less cut and dry determination. How many resources should the government allocate to poverty and to the safety? What role should government play in poverty and safety? How well can government solve poverty or safety issues? What is the outcome of foresaking safety for poverty or vice versa?

In short, I think his answer to the moderators implied question of valuing safety to poverty to be lacking. He answers none of the above questions, nor any of the logical follow up questions.

Overall, though, I think the video was great. When applied to personal finance, it will help me make value decisions much more effectively – at least I hope they will.

By: SJ

SJ — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 04:47:51 +0000

Well, there is his point about context.
If I’m in the desert money has no meaning.
But if I’m in pre-apocalyptic USA 25 bucks has value =)

Also, food does spoil… so depreciating asset!! (lol…)

Trying to decouple the “past” and thinking rational in pure context is tough though; without benchmarks it’s difficult to measure up.

Of course when the benchmarks mess w/ your brain =/

By: Jim

Jim — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 01:02:15 +0000

Well, he is a psychologist.

The funny thing is that $25 really has no actual value. Even if you have $25 in gold, it has no intrinsic value. Food has some intrinsic value because you can always eat it.

By: Jim

Jim — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 22:24:19 +0000

It is just like an addiction, except rather than the a product causing certain chemicals to be produced in your body, drugs do. Runners often crave the runner’s high and those are endorphins, Endorphins are powerful!

By: SJ

SJ — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 21:59:38 +0000

Wow just watched them heh…

Hrm… Is it rational to enjoy the enjoyment and anticipation?

That almost makes it sound like an addiction or something… More to the point I’m not sure I understood the diff between the pleasure this achieves vs. drugs lol

By: Kyle

Kyle — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 20:09:35 +0000

Interesting video, I agree on the lotto point and he strikes me as the kind of guy who can talk about anything and convince you of his opinion. And unless I am starving to death a Big-Mac is not worth $25.

By: the weakonomist

the weakonomist — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 20:05:21 +0000

I love Dan, and his book was fantastic. This video will be queued up to watch when I get home. Looking forward to it because I love these kinds of presentations.