3 ms·

Alternatively, it could be that people do like full service enough to pay for this, but act irrationally at the pump, not the ballot box. I.e. people undervalue

Alternatively, it could be that people do like full service enough to pay for this, but act irrationally at the pump, not the ballot box. I.e. people undervalue their own comfort and do things themselves because the idea of paying more seems so objectionable. This has occurred to me with airlines as well - we relentlessly optimise for cheap flights, and then complain that we're crammed in to tiny seats while flight attendants hawk duty free goods to us. Maybe we'd actually be happier if the cheapest flights were actually 50% more expensive and nicer, even though that's not what we choose.

repsilat 13y ago
Cool idea. Reading your post I thought, "This is obviously wrong," but it's growing on me the more I think about it (making it the best kind of comment to read.)
- AlisdairO 13y ago
  I experience the same thing with charitable giving. While I think I give a reasonable-ish amount out of pocket compared to most people, I absolutely don't give enough to match my ideals - fundamentally, the money is there, in my pocket, and it's hard to part with. On the other hand, at the ballot box, I always vote for parties that tend more redistributive (and since I earn decently, likely to raise my taxes). It's a much easier decision to make when there's that degree of separation.
  - eru 13y ago
    Shouldn't you vote for the party that's best for the less-well off, and not the one that most redistributive? (OK, if you are eg in the US, there's not that much choice in the first place.)
    - AlisdairO 13y ago
      I live in the UK, which like the US has serious problems with income gaps and class mobility. When I say redistributive, I should clarify that I don't just mean 'here poor person, have some money', but more that I would aim towards a more Scandinavian-style economy, where more money/effort is spent on social programs.

repsilat 13y ago

Cool idea. Reading your post I thought, "This is obviously wrong," but it's growing on me the more I think about it (making it the best kind of comment to read.)

AlisdairO 13y ago
I experience the same thing with charitable giving. While I think I give a reasonable-ish amount out of pocket compared to most people, I absolutely don't give enough to match my ideals - fundamentally, the money is there, in my pocket, and it's hard to part with. On the other hand, at the ballot box, I always vote for parties that tend more redistributive (and since I earn decently, likely to raise my taxes). It's a much easier decision to make when there's that degree of separation.
- eru 13y ago
  Shouldn't you vote for the party that's best for the less-well off, and not the one that most redistributive? (OK, if you are eg in the US, there's not that much choice in the first place.)
  - AlisdairO 13y ago
    I live in the UK, which like the US has serious problems with income gaps and class mobility. When I say redistributive, I should clarify that I don't just mean 'here poor person, have some money', but more that I would aim towards a more Scandinavian-style economy, where more money/effort is spent on social programs.