chijanofuji.com
This chapter raises a rather odd question,“What do Schoolteachers and Sumo Wrestlers have in
common?” Once you have read and carefully studied this chapter you should be able to complete
the following tasks which,taken together,answer this and related questions.
Each student should submit their thoughtful answers to this question and respond to the answers of at least 2 other students. Submission answers should contain a response that indicates the student has has a clear understanding of the reading. Students should comment only on the last question. Each student must give 2 current examples of cases (include link to article you are using in your case study)in which moral or social incentives and economic incentives are present and if these differing incentives are complementary or competing
What examples can you think of where moral or social incentives and economic incentives are both
present? Are the different incentives complementary or competing? For each of the cases you cite,
which do you think is the stronger incentive?
1. One example i can think of is when the 18 year old guy was ran over by a train, and his body part hit a person. The person then sued the dead teens family and the train company. HEre is the link. http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2012/01/02/woman-sues-dead-teen-whose-severed-body-parts-struck-her/
ReplyDeleteNow this case makes me think the woman is just trying to get money. I know she was hurt and broke a wrist, but this guy died. Isnt that enough payment? IF the woman has any moral feelings, she should probablly just get free medical service and move on with her life, intead of brining down the devastated family.
Another instance is where several teachers are caught cheating to promote their jobs, school, or students, just like how it was discussed in the book. here is the link. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/18/nyregion/how-cheating-cases-at-new-york-schools-played-out.html?pagewanted=all
I really think that its wrong to manipulate students for your own personal goal. Exept for if some teachers are trying to help the students out of kindness, its brining children down to place yourself up. Even if your trying to help, in the long run you end up hurting them.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteIt doesn't make sense to me either why would 58 year old woman sued dead teenager but the judge did the right to by overturning her case.
DeleteSecond news really tells me that the book we are reading is based of what is happening in today's society. It makes me want read the book more.
You bring an interesting new player into the incentive arena, morals. Can our love money cloud our judgement? It seems that this lady was not thinking rationally. I would've hoped that by the time this went to trial she calmed down and realized the money she could, but didn't, get wouldn't help her get over the traumatic experience or future guilt of profiting off of someone's death. However, anyone is capable of anything if they are desperate enough. I wonder if she was retired or what her financial status was?
DeleteWith regard to your second article, I feel that you're right to say that cheating isn't helping anyone. However, greed is a compulsive thing. We act on it without thinking because we always want more and are often unwilling to wait or work for it.
I really like your views on the cheating teachers, because even though the book said that the teachers cheated from one way, and I feel like myself included but the majority of students have kind of put on blinders and only see those as the true reasons, but your idea that they really are trying to help the student out of kindess really does make sense.
DeleteI agree with the teachers having a moral incentive (trying to help the students) and an economic incentive (to get a raise/more money) at the same time. I think that it was good to speculate the idea that not every teaching is trying to do it for their own personal gain and instead trying to help out students. And I also agree with your concluding statement saying how it generally hurts the students in the long run.
DeleteI really like your views on the cheating teachers. Your idea that they really are trying to help the student out of kindness really does make sense.
DeleteOne thing that could be an example of all three is people that do drugs. Morally, people will think that it is wrong, but, they want their friends tot hink that they are "cool." The price plays a big role as well. You could buy the cheaper drugs, but that might not make you look as good if you were to buy the more expensive drugs.
ReplyDeleteAll incentives tend to work together to push you to do "the right thing." Very rarely are you only thinking about one but you are thinking about all three.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/146896-2/5_reasons_to_buy_the_apple_iphone_3g.html
This article talks about why you should buy an Iphone. It talks about the fact that they are not as expensive as other phones, they have lots of apps, can internationally be used, and also that you "look cool" when you have.
http://www.androidsim.net/2011/08/5-reasons-why-you-should-get-android.html
This article talks about why you should buy an Android. They say that they are cheaper then their competitors, and that they are fully customizable. People might think "wow his background is cool" making you rise higher on the social ladder. Also owning a more expensive phone like an Android also raises you up the social ladder.
I agree with you Ted that some people do drugs just for the fact to try be cool. I think people should accept themselves first before trying get accepted by others.
DeleteAfter reading the article about the Iphone, I feel like I want to get the Iphone 3G. The 5th reason was not really persuasive but the rest were because the talked about how it will with the really life situations.
I liked how the wrote in red to get my attention about why I should buy an Android. Even though the had pictures of Android I think they were not really persuading me to pay the it.
Your opinion about the moral incentive of looking cool being as strong as it is, is fantastic, I never would have thought about this before as a moral incentive, but after reading your response it really makes sense.
DeleteI agree that the need to look cool is definitely a big incentive especially among our generation. We always are looking for the new thing, not to say that we're all hipsters. However, there is a lure to feeling like we're the only ones doing something new, which conflicts with the theory that we are driven by peer pressure. Which is the bigger incentive? Everyone else is doing it or no one else is doing it.
DeleteYour point about the drugs makes a lot of sense; people for years have been doing it for fun or to look cool and to fit in, despite the general feelings of it being wrong, and now with the increase problems in our countries with illegal drugs, it is becoming a erious problem.
DeleteThe example you use is really strong, and it's something I wouldn't have thought of drug use like this. I would have never thought of "being cool" as a moral incentive, but you're right, that's what it could be called. And using the Android vs. iPhone comparison was another good example using the "cool" thing.
DeleteI totally agree. A lot of the time people will only do drugs so their friends will think they are "cool". The social and economic incentives work together to help people make this stupid decision. I also like how you use the IPhone vs. Android comparison as a sign of popularity.
DeleteI disagree with your statement about a lot of people doing drugs to look "cool". From personal experience most of the people I know do drugs because they want to do them, not because they want to be cool. If this were in the '80s or the past, then yes I would agree that people would do drugs/smoke to be cool. But at the same time I agree with you saying that doing drugs is seen as a social incentive because people still can use them as a means of getting to know people/etc.
DeleteI agree with Jon in that, while some people may begin to do drugs under the social incentive of looking cool in front of their friends, the majority of people who do drugs is either just to try them or because they desire to do them under their own influence. This is very prevalent in gatherings like Community Festival downtown in the summer, where although there are a good number of first-time users who were peer pressured into doing it, there is still a majority of people who engage in that activity under their own influence.
DeleteYour view on the drugs is spot on. For years, people have done drugs just to "fit in," and "be cool," even though they know it is wrong. We strive to great lengths to fit in, and in doing so, oftentimes damn ourselves.
Delete1. Example of social incentive and economic incentive could be when your parents award you with new gaming device for passing your classes. It's almost like they are paying you to do your job and once the economic goes down and they paycheck is not enough anymore. You are not going to feel no guilt for falling all your class because it's not your fault.It's your parent fault for not paying you to pass.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this chapter I want to know what is the government doing to prevent this cheating to teachers to not ruing the kids life. I found the article blow.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/story/2012-01-19/teacher-testing-cheating/52683838/1
The Obama administration created a manual teaching school to fight back against cheating teachers. It will guide the schools on how to prevent, detect, and respond to cheating teachers.
I am not sure that is an example of a social incentive but more of a moral one. But anyway i agree parents award children with prizes for getting good grades really pushes you to get good grades in your classes. I also like how Obama is trying to crack down on cheating teachers in schools. You never know how many good teachers are losing their chances at getting jobs because cheating teachers are making themselves look better.
DeleteOne example of a social and economic incentives encourage people could be when you are shopping for clothes. Mainly with teenagers. When teens shop for clothes the first thing the look at is the price. The next thing a teen asks themselves is "Would this make me look popular?" If the piece of clothing is cheap enough for them to afford it, but if it will not make them look popular in the eyes of their friends, most teens will likely not buy the piece of clothing.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ehow.com/info_8471916_pressure-teens-wear-fashionable-clothes.html
This link talks about how teens are pressured to buy popular clothes because they have "fragile sensitivities" so peer pressure to buy popular clothes is more pressing on teens.
Both of the incentives work together to encourage teens to buy popular clothes so they will look cool. I think the social incentive is stronger because of peer pressure on teens to look good or be cool. Plus a teen can ask their parents for a loan or ask for it for their birthday or Christmas if the piece of clothing is costs too much.
Another example would be what type of car a person might buy, they usually want one with good gas mileage, good safety, but they also want their car to look the way they want it to.
http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/Honda_Odyssey/
This article talks about the reasons why you should buy a Honda Odyssey. It talks about the pros and the cons of the Odyssey. It also includes reviews by people who have bought a n Odyssey.
http://usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/cars-trucks/Toyota_Sienna/
This article talks about the reasons why you should buy a Toyota Sienna. This article talks about the pros and cons of the Sienna. It states that the Sienna will last longer than other cars and that its safety is superb.
I completely agree with what you said about the clothes. It's so true! All the time people will buy the more expensive thing just because it's name brand and will make them more popular. But it's all about the rationalizing the decisions, and I think a lot of the time (especially with teenagers), people don't really think about the economic incentives, and focus on the moral incentives, and your example supports this.
DeleteAn example of a case where economic and moral incentives compete against each other is
ReplyDeletewhen people default on their mortgage, even though they can pay it. It is against moral incentives to not pay back the loaned money, but from an economic standpoint, if you have a negative equity, it is frustrating to have more money owed on your house than the actual value of the house. As a result, people go against their moral incentives because they do not want to pay more money on their mortgage. Economics is the stronger incentive. http://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/index.php/Kellogg/article/walking_away
Another example with competing incentives would be buying American products instead of foreign-made products. Morally, you would not want to buy from countries with bad fair trade, with child-labor, unsafe working conditions, or with unfair wages. People would want to support the products that were manufactured fairly in their own country. From an economic standpoint, it is a lot more expensive to buy products made in America. Many people cannot afford to do so, and do not want to make the extra effort to spend extra money on products that they could get cheaper from places like China. The economic incentive drives people's choices more in this example.
http://americanmanufacturing.org/content/unfair-china-trade-costs-local-jobs
I like your example of the mortgages, it's an interesting case of competing incentives over it was your responsibility to pay or get out a bad situation of losing money.
DeleteI like your examples. It is true that we are faced with the decision of buying goods that are made in the U.S. instead of foreign goods. I like how you compared the two incentives.
DeleteI find your examples interesting, though for the first one, a better example is, I believe, one of credit cards, not mortgages. One may own several credit cards, but use other credit cards to pay for the credit cards, despite knowing this is both dumb and wrong, but not knowing how to change. This ends up getting these people into a lot of debt
Delete1. One example of a time when moral and economic incentives compliment each other are charitable donations. A few examples of these are giving money to the American Red Cross baskets during holiday season, donating clothes to the Salvation Army, and donating money for our own Metro-Thon. Charitable donations compliment each other because they make people feel better about themselves morally, and they can be written off (taxes) economically.
ReplyDeletehttp://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/index.php/Kellogg/article/walking_away
The link that I included talks about the guide to charitable giving and what it does for our communities across the country.
2. Another example of complimentary incentives would be a mother buying healthy (possibly organic) food for her family. Morally, it makes the mother feel good because she know's that she is buying the best and healthiest food she can possibly buy for family. She's feeding them the greatest quality of food that the family can afford. On the economics side, we all know that organic/healthier foods are ALWAYS much more expensive than "regular" food. And this benefits the economy because the family is spending way more money on food than another family that doesn't buy any organic food.
http://www.healthkicker.com/687444085/organic-food-and-the-impact-on-health-the-environment-and-the-economy/
The link that I posted talks about the effect buying organic food has on our health, the chemicals in our food, the cost of organic food, and the impact on the environment and economy.
I think the healthy food example is a good example because so many people go through that everyday. Another incentive that could branch off of that would be that sometimes the regular food or junk food tastes better to some people than the organic foods, because do not adjust well to the taste of the natural foods. this could give them even more of an incentive to buy the cheaper, less healthy food because who wants to spend more money on something that you do not like as much?
DeleteWhen actors and actresses star on T.V. or in movies they are gaining both social and economic incentives. From the social standpoint, the actor or actress gains popularity and a high social status. They are well known, easily recognized, and loved by many people. From an economic perspective, actors and actresses receive an enormous amount of money from living the dream that many people wish for. It is very beneficial for them to accept these incentives. Overall, actors and actresses gain allot from their complimentary social and economic incentives.
ReplyDeleteGiving money to charity is also a good example of complimentary moral and economic incentives. The moral incentive in giving charity is that you feel like you did a good thing. Sometimes people do things to feel good about themselves and to do nice things for others, which is a major incentive. Along with helping others and felling good about yourself, giving money to charity can also result in a tax deduction. By giving charity, you are not only receiving the incentive of a tax reduction, but you are also deciding where your money goes. These are two of the main incentives that giving to charity has to offer.
Resources:
http://library.thinkquest.org/3340/TOPFIL.HTM
http://www.internetseer.com/services/article.xtp?id=26323
i agree but they thing i don't get why some people but not all do is that they give to charity because of the tax deduction. i don't think its it right personally but for others they think it is nice. it is ok to give to charity and receive a tax deduction but its not good when you think in your head oh this is the only reason why i am doing this. for example the teacher cheating in the book, some teachers might think in their heads oh i am only helping this kids because of the money or the promoting but some teachers might say i really care about this kids and will help. you shouldn't think about the economic offers you get for what you do but do it to make you and the person happy.
DeleteI like your example about how actors and actresses get an extrem amount of social and economic incentives. But to add a moral to that example you could say that actors make so much money that they have he option to donate to children hospitals, charity etc...
Deletematthew i like how you used an example where the social and economic incentives went hand in hand with each other because they were both beneficial to the actress and actor. When I read it, I also thought about the incentives of the director who is going to hire these famous, popular actresses or actors. They have a social incentive to hire them because they are popular and can gain popularity and attention for their movie which racks in more $$$$, but they also entail a higher profit because they are in high demand. so the director has to weigh the social incentives to the economic losses. if they think their movie will gain more popularity and money than it will lose in the price of hiring the famous actor, they will hire them.
DeleteI really like the actors and actresses thing ! It's a great example. I never thought about them being social and economic incentives.. But they are. And I agree with the charity thing too. I also talked about charity :) Good Job!
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAn example of where social and economic incentives are both present is say when you're at a restaurant and you know that the populace of said restaurant isn't gonna tip well or at all because they're a bunch of high schoolers so you tip generously for your server because you know you're either their only tip or one of a few, you have social incentive of being nice to the guy, but you have economic incentive the other way in that hey I'm a broke high schooler, they couldn't be expecting me to tip them, I need this money.
ReplyDeleteI think that the incentives are complimentary, just because economics are affected by your social standing, like in my previous example the economic incentive to not tip and keep your money id brought about by your social standing as a broke high schooler, it's similar to the bagel business because the executives feel like they don't have to pay for their bagels because they're executives and think that their better than Paul Feldman.
I think that social incentive is higher because in most cases your social incentive is what causes your economic incentive.
The economic stand point could actually change i think. If you don,t have a lot of money or are almost out of carrying money and need to fill up your car you might just not have enough to tip the poor highschooler.
DeleteI like what your example of tipping the waiter, I think it's something people don't put much thought into. I know I don't really ever know what to tip people, so that could be one reason why the teenagers might tip. But in doing so, they affect the tips for their waiter, they will also feel bad and look bad in front of their friends.
DeleteI agree that highschoolers typically think that way (I do...); that we think no one is expecting us to take responsibility. It's a small economic incentive of being a teenager that I've never thought of....
DeleteAnd I completely agree with the correlation to the businessmen and the bagels. It's like we're on this track where we don't have to take responsibility, then we do, then we don't again.
An example of where moral and economic incentives are both present might be when you decide you ar going to bye a t.v at best buy. you see that the 36in t.v is $300 and the 46 in t.v is only$400. you are going to have to decide weather or not you are wanting to pay an extra $100 for a larger t.v (moral). on an economic standpoint however they are planing on more people to buy the large t.v since it is only $100 more.
ReplyDeleteAnother example of where moral and economic incentives take place might be when you decide to go eat out that day and their is a large sign that reads"kids eat free on weekends". this is a moral incentive because you have to decide if you want to eat here where it might be expensive or a another place where it might be a lot cheaper. in an economic standpoint, they are trying to weel people in in buying their food buy letting kids eat free.
I think incentives are competing in most ways. for example the t.vs at BestBuy might be cheaper then the ones at Walmart. so therefore it might be competing by each store having better deals than one another. Another example of why competing incentives are better, is when the deal of how kids eat free. this might attract more costumers which will lower the amount of costumers at other restaurants. these restaurants then might start adding on better deals to star a little composition.
I think that competing incentives and complementary kind of work together so that they are both equal.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletei agree with you that incentives are competing but not all incentives are competing, its like an equal things sometimes. but i think the things that makes or depends if an incentive is competing or complement is based on the situation at hand, some people make this one thing is a competing incentive but then other person might think different. i think it depends on the situation and how people interpret it, i may be wrong but thats how i think its it
DeleteThe bottle and money incentive. That is an example of a social/ moral incentive with an economic incentive. you take bottle that you drink from and take it to the recycling place. you get a deposit return for the bottles you bring in, that is an economic incentive. the social/moral incentive is when you hear or feel the environmentally sound of the bottles being recycled. here is the link
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ifo.de/portal/pls/portal/docs/1/1189128.PDF . In this case i personally think that people all recycle their bottles and other recyclable things just for the deposit. even thought they are helping make the Earth a better place they are only doing it for the money. I'm not saying it is bad to recycle but recycle from your heart not the deposit you get back, if you are doing something good and it comes from your heart you don't care much about the prize you get weather you get one or not.
Another example is tax incentives, economic incentive for charitable giving moral incentive. You make a charity giving and then when you are filling your taxes you put it on and get economic benefits (tax incentive). Here is the link http://learningtogive.org/papers/paper63.html. Different people have a reason why they donations to charities, some are good and some are just not for a good cost, most but not all people do it for the tax incentive. When they donate they put it on the tax return and it is used in calculating the ultimate tax liability. In this case some people donate to charity for the reduced taxes and that shouldn't be the thought behind donation to charity like i said before you should not expect something back when you give to somebody. Just because you get tax incentives does not mean you donate just because of that, I think the government give the people who donate something else as a thank you, something that will not mean much to them so that they can donate from their hearts.
I would say that one is competitive and one is complementary. i think the tax and charity is a strong
incentive." i say the bottle one is competitive because the proceeds from bottle deposits tend to reduce the price of beverages in a competitive environment and therefore lead to a departure from a first best allocation. Second, the system usually requires producers and vendors to run a system for taking back and recycling used containers, whose cost vendors can only partly shift to consumers who return their bottles." i got that explanation from the bottle link
The bottle rcycling seems like the opposite to me of the blood donation thing. People usually need incentive to recycle because naturally they are lasy and its easier to just have one trash bin to throw everything away in. So even though more people should do it for the moral they could do it for economic to because it would put more money into circulation and not as much fuel and energy would be used to burn and put trash in landfills.
DeleteAn example of where moral and economic incentives compete is in organic food. Theoretically, buying organic is much better for the environment, and better for your health, because there are no pesticides, and organic food is typically lower in fat, sugar, and artificial ingredients. However, it’s also very expensive, so there is an economic disincentive to buy organic food, even though organic food usually has a higher nutrient content, and you might be getting more for your money. Buying and selling organic food is very popular right now, and comes off as cool and friendly. People feel healthier when they eat organically, and feel special because they’re paying more for their food, and therefore think they care more about when they put in their bodies.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/01/business/01organic.html?ref=organicfood
This article is talking about how organic food was booming in past years, but as family food budgets become tighter, people are caring less about where their food came from and how it was made. However, organic products that advertise health incentives might not fall off the map as much as fair trade items (which are usually organic as well). A counter-argument might be that since people aren’t buying vacations or luxury cars, they might buy a more expensive item that is actually in their reach, like organic milk or cereal.
The question, then, is what is the strongest incentive whether or not to buy organic food. The incentive to getting something healthier is stronger incentive over the price for you, right? But is that the stronger incentive for most people? I'd rather buy regular eggs for $2 than the organic eggs for $5 when it's that expensive because the chickens were free-range and cost more for the farmer.
DeleteAn example of the different incentives present can be this article (http://www.thenewstribune.com/2012/02/18/2032271/legislators-hear-lots-of-support.html) about an incentive program for film productions in Alaska. The incentive is both complimented by the economic incentive that film producers can get back one third of the costs making the film in Alaska, and the social incentive to bring accurate movies and creating a network for different businesses in Alaska. The film crew goes to Alaska to film their movie, which can bring accuracy and merit to the movie. Businesses in the state profit from the construction crew that create sets or whatever is needed, to the catering services that bring food.
ReplyDeleteThe stronger incentive is for the crew to be able to get some of that money back, because going all the way to places like Alaska to get the shots needed for the movie can be quite expensive, and many people in Alaska support the program.
Another case is this article (http://www.tulsaworld.com/business/article.aspx?subjectid=45&articleid=20120216_45_E2_CUTLIN390795) that talks about how union workers for American Airlines proposed an incentive program to reduce layoffs. The plan proposes that instead of laying-off thousands of workings, the airline create an retirement inventive strategy to retire a large part of the work force. The economic incentives compliment the social incentives in that the union workers want to be treated fairly, and the plan to give many of the workers and the retirement plan instead of laying-off is better for both the workers and the company. The strongest incentive is the economic, as it is suppose to help the airline from bankruptcy and continue in the industry as well as give enough to workers for retirement.
I guess if accuracy is important, it is good that there is a program to benefiet everyone in Alaska. The second topic is a bit hard to grasp. IS it pretty much just somthing were airlines are making a retirement program for workers? IT sounds like it costs money, but unions still confuse me, so i guess the union helps pay for it or somthing. THey both sound like more people benefiet than get costed.
DeleteI agree with the second thing, that is a much better option. I wonder if that will cost the airline a lot to do that? As long as it isn’t further hurting the company; how you wrote is a little confusing because I can’t determine if it’s costing the company anything but maybe the costs are just outweighed by the benefit of not having the employees at all?
DeleteThe case I chose is an on going debate that occurs in Ohio and other states as well as countries around the world. The moral incentive to not allow casinos is that lawmakers have to have it on their conscience that normal people who might not have wanted to drive all the way to another state to gamble will now have the ability to gamble close to them thus increasing the amount of gamblers. While the economic incentive is to allow it because it is more economical for a person to do something in their own state than to have to drive out of state thereby keeping the money spent in the home state. As well, there is also the part where gambling is happening illegally anyway and you might as well get taxes off of it if people are just going to do it anyway. As well, if what they are doing illegally becomes legal then you could also make them spend on alcohol and food that further helps the economy of your state. In conclusion the moral and economic incentives kind of oppose each other but the economic incentives in my opinion very well outweigh the moral incentives because the tax revenue from the casinos as well as the tourism income could also help to fund programs to help gamblers as well as to help the police to stop any crime that might be a result.
ReplyDeleteResources:
http://debates.juggle.com/do-the-benefits-of-legalized-gambling-such-as-job-creation-and-tourism-generation-outweigh-the-social-and-economic-costs-associated-with-gambling
http://www.rtgbonuscodes.com/benefits-of-gambling.html
Part 2:
The second case I chose is another on going debate “Should the United States Federal Government permit the use of financial incentives to encourage organ donation?” Now before I go further into this the debate was whether to PERMIT the use of financial incentives, not that the government would be giving financial incentives. The moral incentive or rather a disincentive is that many believe that if you do this than the less fortunate, or in other words the poor, would be the only class to use this because they are the only ones that need the money so then you must have it on your conscience that you are praying on the poor to lengthen the lives of the wealthier, or yet again in other words the people with health insurance. There is another possible outcome that could come out of this that would be a moral problem and that is if they do allow incentives for donations of organs than you could be promoting organ stealing or even murder for just a little bit of money. But there is also the other moral incentive that allowing it would save countless lives a day because offering an incentive to give would increase the number of available organs for those who desperately need them. Now on the other hand you have the economic incentive which is if you offer incentives for organ donations you could “Create a new market that could go on a global scale.” In my opinion these two incentives are largely opposing each other but they also in some examples complement each other and that is in the case of saving lives as well as making a new global market. In the end I believe that the moral incentive or rather disincentive is stronger than the economic incentive.
Resources:
http://debates.juggle.com/should-the-united-states-federal-government-permit-the-use-of-financial-incentives-to-encourage-organ-donation
http://www.forensicsonline.net/forum/uploads/2/3/7/8/6/447012997749497741.pdf
About the casinos in Ohio; I agree with your thought that the economic incentives definitely outweigh the moral incentives. Not just because the taxes and gambling revenue will provide a lot of extra money to be put to good causes. But also because the moral incentive to not gamble is really not that high, even people who's religion pleas not to gamble, still do it.
DeleteWhat examples can you think of where moral or social incentives and economic incentives are both present?
ReplyDeletePaying taxes.
Paying taxes is a huge controversy to many people, some people feel they pay too much and others feel say that people are not paying enough.
People pay taxes to receive many benefits from the government, like construction and healthcare.
An economic incentive of paying taxes is the tax return that you may receive after filing your taxes.
You could also say that an economic incentive would be knowing that your money is going towards things that will benefit you.
Moral incentives would be knowing that you're doing your duty as an American citizen and giving back what to help what your government is giving to you. You would know that this tax money would be going to help improve your city and state as a whole.
Social incentives include being able to know what social class you are in, though you may not find that so good depending on what class you are in, and, also, the tax money often goes to benefit everyone in your community.
Are the different incentives complementary or competing? For each of the cases you cite, which do you think is the stronger incentive?
Other than having to pay the taxes, the incentives tend to be more complementary than competing.
Each incentive gives the tax payer more reason and encouragement to feel and know that their money is going towards something that will not only benefit them, but it will also benefit their community, and, at the end of the day, they may even up with a bit of that money back in their pocket.
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/editorials/2012/02/18/republican-presidents-policies-were-more-taxing-than-obamas.html
I agree with the economic and moral incentives that you provide about taxes, but did you consider the social incentives to paying taxes? Say a community of people all paid their taxes and were happy to do it even if someone didn't want to pay at all, a social incentive may be to pay just to fit in with everyone. And if there was community with a bunch of tax evaders and you paid your taxes, you might get put down for buying into the system and, in turn, not feel welcome.
DeleteI agree partly, there is an economic and moral incentive but there might also be an economic incentive to not pay your taxes. The tax return is just money that the government took from you that they shouldn't have so you could just not give any money and come out stronger economically than if you had paid your taxes. But there is also the moral incentive that you could go to jail if you don’t pay your taxes so that might cross that out... In conclusion other than not really including much on the economic incentive to not pay taxes i believe this is very good and I agree.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSame-sex marriage is a political struggle that is mostly a battle of morals, but it has many factors that can result in different economic and social incentives. Many people are homo-sexual and extremely support gay marriage, and some people are straight and still back it up. Others, however, believe it is just absolutely wrong and should not be legal anywhere. An economic incentive to this is to allow gay marriage because it will bring in more revenue to the marriage industry and fluctuate the economy. A social incentive, on the other hand, is to not allow the homo marriage because others (mostly patriotic, conservative americans) believe it is bad and will put people down who say otherwise.
ReplyDeleteThese two incentives are extremely competitive because they argue exact opposite beliefs. The social incentive outweighs the economic by a long shot, however, because no matter what, people are always getting married. Even if they have less business because of no same-sex marriage, they will just rack up the prices of marriage costs to fit the amount of business.
Recourses: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/feb/14/valentines-day-gay-marriage-protest
http://www.washingtonpost.com/maryland-house-almost-didnt-pass-gay-marriage-bill/2012/02/18/gIQAqrBQMR_story.html
I like the economic and social incentives that you gave in your examples about incentives. A way you could extend this example is might be adding a stronger moral incentive. For example people may or may-not think gay marriages are right, but its mainly an opinion someone may have.
DeleteI like how you identified that the economic incentive and the social incentive contradict each other. You gave plenty of details to back up your idea.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI don't understand some of this... It's kinda confusing at times. You said that many people are homosexual.. Do you have like any statistics to back this up so I can see?? But other than that, I thought it was really good :) It's a very controversial topic
DeleteThis is a really great topic that I hadn't even thought of from an economic standpoint. Could another economic incentive (incentive, disincentive... depends on your POV) be when people list their spouse on medical insurance documents when they get a job? Also, the social incentive I think can be seen from the opposite POV; that we could be viewed as a more accepting nation when we allow marriages between all of our citizens, and possibly solve a huge controversy in our society.
DeleteAlright so as we all know Greece is having some financial issues and the Europe Union (EU) is the only group talking about bailing them out. On one level it looks as though the EU is helping a fellow country out. However, the more blunt economic reason driving the bailout is that if Greece fails the entire European currency (Euro) will fail. Also Greece has/is having issues with people striking for greater salaries. If the EU doesn't help stabilize Greece in an effort to resolve this matter, importing and exporting with Greece will prove to be more difficult than in past years. These different incentives driving the EU are complementary in that the second incentive (import/export) will directly affect the first (saving the Euro) without necessarily being choose this or that.
ReplyDeleteMy second article includes a couple parties with economic and social incentives. A man in LA
recently wrote about an incentive for people to go out and get active. He pointed out the amount of money one can find on the ground strictly by walking. There is now an incentive to walk as opposed to watching television, working or whatever else, you make money. However, which would give us more pleasure making a few cents with which we can buy nothing, or staying at home and goofing off. Also should you go on the walk, are you really going to notice every disgusting penny on the ground and, heaven forbid, pick in up. The incentive not to get sick or dirty may outweigh the benefit of adding a penny to your pocket. So I would like to say those two are competing. The other party affected by incentives is the person who dropped the money in the first place. Most people can hear when they drop change. There is an incentive to pick it up, if they can easily locate it, or they can just leave it for a passer by. However, if it rolls under something and the person can't easily find it the incentive to pick it up will be lessened because the incentive to move on and leave an ultimately worthless piece of metal behind is too great.
I believe that the first article has a stronger incentive mainly because if the Euro fails than there are more implications detrimental to the world than someone's decision to pick up a penny that can be used to buy nothing.
The first paragrapgh is somthing that i agree with. If Greece goes down the euro will be severly damaged or altogether destroyed. HOwever, Greece shouldn't just accept a debt, they should do more than just extra taxes. They had their time of free time, now they have a harder life then most. They didn't find a balance.
DeleteTHe second paragraph is interesting, but i think that the main incentive to walk would just be to save gas money. And exersive is good too. BUt i know one time i found a 20$ bill under a swing. Well my freind found it. But i was there, anyways you never know what you will find, and walking around is always good.
Just noticed I forgot the links. Sorry!
Deletehttp://www.latimes.com/health/la-he-myturn-spare-change-20120102,0,3484940.story
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2012/02/21/in-latest-greek-bailout-warning-signs-for-europe/?scp=2&sq=Greek%20bailout&st=cse
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAn example where moral incentives and economic incentives are present are when there is fossil fuels underneath the earth and you want to extract for the boost to the economy but you could have a moral incentive of is it right to destroy lots of land and emit lots of pollutants. The economic incentive is higher you can see that through out history, and the different incentives are competing. http://marcellusdrilling.com/2011/02/hydraulic-fracturing-used-in-ohio-for-more-than-40-years-thousands-of-wells-drilled-without-incident/
ReplyDeleteAnother example of where social and economic incentives are is foreign aid. When we send money to other countries and help them it is good socially and the incentive is we might become allies or something similar. Economically the incentive is to help the other country and their economy but it harms ours by taking money away. The social incentive usually outweighs the economic incentive in this aspect because people like to for the most part be helpful.http://www.debate.org/debates/Giving-Away-Foreign-Aid-to-Africa-is-a-Good-Idea/1/
1.Explain how the imposition of a fine for tardy parents at a day care center may have altered the motivations of these parents.
ReplyDeleteIt made the parents feel as if by simply giving the some money to the Day-Care, their children could stay longer. And the fine was so small, it made it feel like the issue was no big deal.
2.What is an incentive? How does it relate to the study of economics?
An incentive is a benefit that motivates people to do something or act a certain way.
3.What examples can you think of where moral or social incentives and economic incentives are both present? Are the different incentives complementary or competing? For each of the cases you cite, which do you think is the stronger incentive?
1.) Robbery, because stealing is wrong, and generally scorned, but if you need to feed a family, it can be economically viable.
2.) Getting a job when young, as a member of a large family. Moral incentives would be to help keep your family secure, and economic incentives would come into play by keeping your family economically secure.
1. One situation I found that has social and economic incentives is Snooki from Jersey Shore being sued 7 million dollars over a merchandise deal that went wrong. Snooki signed a deal with SRG Ventures to produce a clothing line based off her, this was a smart move by them because tons and tons of people watch Jersey Shore and love it, a good social incentive for them. But Snooki decided that SRG wasn't keeping up their part of the deal and decided to sue them, being an economic incentive to get money. SRG didn't take too lightly to the law suit and decided to counter sue Snooki for 7 million dollars, an economic incentive. The economic incentive clearly outweighs the social incentive, but both are still present.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/12/20/jersey-shore-snooki-hit-w_n_1161586.html
Another situation is that a 14 year old girl decided to sue her family to stop them from making her get an abortion. This situation has moral and social incentive, the girl doesn't believe/support abortion and would rather have the baby but her parents do not want her to have the baby. That's the moral part, the social part is she might not want people to think less of her/bad of her for getting a divorce and would rather have the baby. I think the moral and social incentive don't outweigh eachother in this situation.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/10/teen-sues-family-abortion_n_1197832.html
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=125601
ReplyDeleteIn this particular case there was a clear economic incentive of being able to make a lot more money by rigging games than there could possibly be by winning those same matches, however the moral incentive points in the opposite direction. Cheating in and of itself has a negative moral incentive, at the same time the people involved became outcasts showing a social incentive. Personally I believe the social and moral incentives are stronger, but in this case for the people involved the economic incentives clearly seemed stronger.
Freakonomics Pages 20-21 - The case on blood donation
This is a clear case of the economic incentive of getting paid for your actions negates the moral incentive of donating to help someone. If someone were to get paid to do this type of charity, it no longer feels like charity. The action starts to feel like one more thing that we would do in a dark alley for 20 bucks.
One thing that could be seen to have moral, social and economic incentives is the law about drinking alcohol in the United States. The law has an interesting past, since it was banned twice in American history. The main reason that it is legal today is because of people's desire for alcohol. Socially, it is a normal and acceptable thing to have drinks at many types of gatherings and parties. There are different views on the morality of alcohol, however. Some think that it is unhealthy for the body and can severely damage it over time, so they avoid it. Others are against drinking alcohol for religious reasons. Either way, it is obvious that people have different stances on the drinking and selling of alcohol.
ReplyDeleteThis is where different economic motives come in. When the prohibition had first happened in the 1920's, stores or bars that sold a lot of alcohol mainly ran out of business because of this new law. It became much more hard to get access of any intoxicating drinks, so people resorted to obtaining them differently. In other words, they went to areas that sold alcohol illegally and out of the publics eye. This was beneficial to the owners of the illegal 'bars' since they got to charge extremely high prices for alcohol since the supply of it had gone down. So the stronger incentive in the case of this law was that people who sold alcohol illegally could now charge more and get a bigger profit from it. (http://history1900s.about.com/od/1920s/p/prohibition.htm).
I think prohibition highlights this disparity in incentives quite nicely. Some people have a moral incentive to support prohibition, while others have an economic incentive to oppose it. There are also unintended consequences in play, such as the illegal bootlegging of alcohol and the profits from it supporting mobs. In this way, prohibitionists unintentionally set up the conditions in which mobs could flourish, leading to deaths and violence.
DeleteAn example of where moral and economic incentives are both present might be when you decide you are going to buy a laptop at best buy. You see that the Mac book Pro is $1,400 and the dell Notebook is only $500. Having to decide weather or not you want to pay an extra $900 for a better quality laptop (moral). An economic standpoint is not being able to afford that extra $900 on more when having a mortgage and bills.
ReplyDeleteGiving money to any non-profit organization like the American Red Cross during donation season, donating old hand me down to the Salvation Army, and donating money for our own Metro-Thon. Bountiful donations compliment each other because they make people feel better about themselves morally, and they can be written off on tax forms, (economically)
1. http://www.epa.gov/osw/conserve/rrr/recycle.htm
ReplyDeleteThere is a large moral incentive behind recycling. Most, if not all people recycle because it’s better for our landfills and the Earth as a whole. Honestly, recycling is better for the planet because it reduces the amount of pollution given off by making products from new materials. There is also a small economic incentive for recycling. In most, if not every state, pop cans can be recycled and there is a small pay in return. This is the same for most scrap metals. So people feel good about recycling because they are helping better the planet, and in some circumstances they are being paid to do it. I think the moral incentive is a stronger incentive. Some people want to recycle just to help the planet, and some communities even have to pay extra for recycling bins.
2. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/14/sports/baseball/14bonds.html?pagewanted=all
This article is about the Barry Bonds steroid scandal. In 2003, Barry Bond testified about using performance-enhancing drugs while playing for the San Francisco Giants. During the time he played for them, he broke Hank Aaron’s homerun record with 762 home runs at the end of his career. A moral incentive behind Barry Bonds using steroids is that the steroids would supposedly make him play better, which would give him more confidence. An economic incentive behind using steroids is that the steroids would help Barry Bonds play better, which helped him break Hank Aaron’s would record. After be beat the record, he went down in history, and his pay probably increased.
I find it interesting that the moral and economic incentives of recycling are aligned, but recycling remains less common that should be expected. Another incentive that might be included is that of human laziness. People may be unwilling to put in the extra effort.
DeleteI disagree somewhat regarding the moral incentive in the Barry Bonds case; I think there is no moral incentive for him to cheat, but rather one for him not to. I believe the incentives are in fact opposing one another here.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2012/0625/Obama-Outsourcing-is-part-of-Romney-s-economic-vision
ReplyDeleteIn this case, there is a clear economic incentive to outsource jobs: saving money, cutting costs, and increasing revenue. The moral incentive present opposes it: preserving jobs in America and maintaining a good relationship with the public. Mitt Romney appears to favor the economic incentive, as he chooses to outsource jobs.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2012-06-25/detroit-firefighter-layoffs/55827788/1
This case also has a moral incentive, that of protecting the public and ensuring the safety of citizens, as well as an economic one, that of keeping the governmental budget balanced and preventing debt. In this case, these incentives oppose one another, since firefighters are expensive to keep on the payroll. The economic incentive seems to be more compelling, since layoffs are occurring.
@Anthony- I definitely agree with this situation and it's incentives. This can be applied to many things we buy in everyday life
ReplyDelete@Michael Lipster-I thought that the situation with tipping the waiter was interesting. I personally never would have thought about that. It definitely feels like a huge moral incentive to tip better in a restaurant