Does “never enough” always beat out “enough” in the long term?
Examples: does “hustle culture” beat out “quiet quitting?”
Does “maximized profits” always beat out “enough profits?”
In essence, if one wanted to be content with enough, would the position be untenable if everyone else wanted more and are able to push their position with the excess economic gains of their perspective?
Short answer is “being content with what you have is a viable strategy for absolute wealth but will inevitably lose in a positional competition,” no? We already see that all the time in the real world, just look at everyone who works diligently at their job without putting in overtime, often knowingly dooming themselves to miss out on promotions but not starving. Or all retirees. To win you have to compete harder than everyone else, but the wealthier society gets the more room you have to prioritize things other than winning.
Is there some theory for why that wouldn’t be the case? In societies like ours, not one where our population returns to a state of pushing against carrying capacity.
Hello Dr Fairweather,
I have a weird game theory question:
Does “never enough” always beat out “enough” in the long term?
Examples: does “hustle culture” beat out “quiet quitting?”
Does “maximized profits” always beat out “enough profits?”
In essence, if one wanted to be content with enough, would the position be untenable if everyone else wanted more and are able to push their position with the excess economic gains of their perspective?
Short answer is “being content with what you have is a viable strategy for absolute wealth but will inevitably lose in a positional competition,” no? We already see that all the time in the real world, just look at everyone who works diligently at their job without putting in overtime, often knowingly dooming themselves to miss out on promotions but not starving. Or all retirees. To win you have to compete harder than everyone else, but the wealthier society gets the more room you have to prioritize things other than winning.
Is there some theory for why that wouldn’t be the case? In societies like ours, not one where our population returns to a state of pushing against carrying capacity.
What advice would you give to a higher schooler looking to become an economist?
Hi Daryl,
Do you agree with those who say there's an 18.6 year real estate cycle (see link below)?
Rich Nymoen
https://propertysharemarketeconomics.com/18-point-6-property-share-market-economics/
Thanks Aryan and Daryl!
Disclosure: I'm a Math major and Carleton alum