Friends list vs. American public: ROUND 1, FIGHT!

Jul 15, 2007 15:57

Poll Economics hypotheticals

Once you're done, see how other Americans answer these questions. All I can conclude is that something is wrong with somebody, somewhere.

(Incidentally, the article's an insightful look at why the United States is the only -- only -- advanced economy in the world that does not guarantee its workers paid vacation. That alone makes it worth a ( Read more... )

politics, work, polls

Leave a comment

Comments 44

elynne July 15 2007, 23:35:17 UTC
My answer to the first one is contingent on the fact that I make barely more than minimum wage, and usually work two (or less) days a week - so from that perspective, 10% pay increase for 10% work increase is a perfectly acceptable tradeoff. That, and my job rocks.

Answering the second is more problematic. I just don't give a damn about how much land or square footage everybody else has - I have a large family, I need a lot of room, and I'd like more room. It's not meant to impress anybody, I just want a library, art studio/office, and a yard big enough for dogs. :)

Reply


heron61 July 15 2007, 23:41:41 UTC
You have a 3,000-square-foot house and everyone else has a 2,000-square-foot house
vs.
You have a 4,000-square-foot house and everyone else has a 6,000-square-foot house

I'm not certain that I believe the studies that say most Americans prefer the first option, I'd want to see the methodology on the study. I suspect that a more true statement might be that business and advertising really wants us to believe this way and are doing their best to make people think that most people think this way. OTOH, if it is true, then values in this nation are screwed up beyond my worst fears.

Reply

baxil July 16 2007, 18:12:06 UTC
I did a Google search to see if I could find some references, and most of the times the question is cited lead back to Robert H. Frank papers. (e.g. "Falling Behind" [PDF link: Google's HTML version], or "Are Positional Externalities Different From Other Externalities?" [PDF link: Google's HTML version].) He describes the hypothetical and says "In fact, however, most people say they would pick B, where their absolute house size is smaller and their relative house size is larger." -- but doesn't directly cite the source. If you're curious, I urge you to send him an e-mail via the link on his home page. (And you can even grab some mp3s put out by his son's band while you're there. :-))

Incidentally, though that paper doesn't directly address the absolute-vs.-relative-house-size question, the graph on happiness vs. wealth level in "Does Absolute Income Matter" is telling.

Reply


dewhitton July 15 2007, 23:55:02 UTC
I'm not "other Americans," so I'll answer here.

Like Elynn I don't care about my house size vs everyone else's house size. I just want a house that is big enough for me. I do wonder about the size of some of the houses I see being built in Sydney.

Here in Aus we are guaranteed a minimum wage of AU$13.47/hour. Everyone pays a 1.5% tax to fund Medicare, which is free for anyone to use. You are free to take out private health insurance if you want. (I have some to cover glasses and ambulance, neither of which are covered by Medicare.) Everyone gets 4 weeks (ie 28 days) annual leave, or they get paid them in lieu.

But all this is being eroded due to new policies brought in by the conservative government. The bastards.

Reply

baxil July 16 2007, 17:28:54 UTC
Does your country need chefs or system administrators? kadyg and I are available.

Reply

quen_elf July 16 2007, 21:16:33 UTC
Not to point out the obvious but you could also move virtually anywhere in Europe and get similar benefits (and the taxes to pay for them). I expect virtually anywhere in Europe needs chefs and system administrators. :) That said, immigration wouldn't be trivial.

Reply

baxil July 17 2007, 08:25:31 UTC
Yeah, the "immigration not trivial" thing has always been frustrating. In all directions. It seems to be like pulling teeth, no matter where you start and where you're trying to end.

Reply


pathia July 16 2007, 00:00:47 UTC
I only work 20-30hours a week right now (Pending my new real job later *fingers crossed*) So my answer is slanted.

Reply


hafoc July 16 2007, 00:20:33 UTC
For now, because of retirement fund deductions and paying for toys I don't really need, I couldn't take the 10% cut option. But maybe in a year or two, I will. It's available to me.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up