2 ms·

This "People that pay for each component of each meal probably waste considerably less..." is one of those arguments that depend on Economic Man being real. It

by Zigurd 4y ago

This "People that pay for each component of each meal probably waste considerably less..." is one of those arguments that depend on Economic Man being real. It is in fact rational to pay flat rates even when some subset of the population gets outsize benefits and others pay more than they otherwise would. That's why your ISP bill is flat rate (albeit with a cap). That means that within a wide range of use cases, your bill is predictable. Predictability has value. Economists may argue that more variables let you optimize systems. But real humans have a limited ability to pay attention to their economics. Getting rid of trays looks like an obvious winner. But paying for every item in a dining hall would be a sucky UX and lead to perverse outcomes because customers will find the product hard to use.

mejutoco 4y ago
I find the point about predictability interesting. Personally, sometimes (not always) I have been in a buffet and the quality is very low because some people eat as much as they can. In that context I would gladly have paid per item. Point one, quality may change when charged per item. > But paying for every item in a dining hall would be a sucky UX and lead to perverse outcomes because customers will find the product hard to use. I basically only disagree with you on this one. This is exactly how restaurants work, and customers do not find it hard to use. They still often have a menu to combine a subset of all the items available under a common pricing. IMO it is cultural. I believe it is a combination of two factors: First, do we think of the students as intelligent creatures, with discerning capabilities, or as cattle to be fed? And second, do we value the quality of food, or it is just a problem to be solved at the minimum cost? Paying per component or buffet can both work. I do not think one is more efficient/rational. Quality, freshness of product, amount of food wasted, variance in price, health implications, can change a lot between both approaches.

by Zigurd 4y ago

mejutoco 4y ago

I find the point about predictability interesting. Personally, sometimes (not always) I have been in a buffet and the quality is very low because some people eat as much as they can. In that context I would gladly have paid per item. Point one, quality may change when charged per item. > But paying for every item in a dining hall would be a sucky UX and lead to perverse outcomes because customers will find the product hard to use. I basically only disagree with you on this one. This is exactly how restaurants work, and customers do not find it hard to use. They still often have a menu to combine a subset of all the items available under a common pricing. IMO it is cultural. I believe it is a combination of two factors: First, do we think of the students as intelligent creatures, with discerning capabilities, or as cattle to be fed? And second, do we value the quality of food, or it is just a problem to be solved at the minimum cost? Paying per component or buffet can both work. I do not think one is more efficient/rational. Quality, freshness of product, amount of food wasted, variance in price, health implications, can change a lot between both approaches.