There is a set of games where your opponent can threaten, "Unless you X, I will Y!" where both X and Y are undesirable for you. It's perfectly reasonable in a

There is a set of games where your opponent can threaten, "Unless you X, I will Y!" where both X and Y are undesirable for you. It's perfectly reasonable in a one-off match to X, so long as it's less painful than Y. In the iterated game, though, it seems weird to cave. If the game works, why wouldn't the opponent just play it over and over again, repeating Y or the threat of Y, increasing the pain indefinitely? This seems like it applies to government shutdowns, strikes, and even some hostage situations. Government shutdowns should lead to an agreement to keep the government open indefinitely, no-strike bonuses should comprise a meaningful portion of workers' wages after the first strike-induced labor/management negotiations.