4 ms·

> Conclusion: we don't want to pay related to the value we receive for a certain service, but to the amount of effort involved in the delivery of that service.

by Iv 12y ago

> Conclusion: we don't want to pay related to the value we receive for a certain service, but to the amount of effort involved in the delivery of that service. But is that irrational? This seems to be a personal preference. By refusing to pay the same price for 10 minutes of work or one hour of work, we assert that we do believe in a certain income equality. "Disturbing someone for one hour vs 10 minutes" is not a necessarily irrational way to look at the situation.

javert 12y ago
No, people get angry at being charged $70 for 10 minutes of work because they think they're getting cheated, even though in this case they aren't. You're not going to find your rationalization for socialism here.
- jacalata 12y ago
  And why do they think they're getting cheated?
  - wolfgke 12y ago
    Because the hourly rate looks very high.
anaolykarpov 12y ago
It seems more rational to look at things as having your doorlock fixed, because that is why you call for the locksmith. You don't call just to see someone doing his job for the sake of it.
- vegedor 12y ago
  You call the locksmith because you want to get inside your shelter, having the door fixed is just a utility to get there. Your home is where you feel secure, and it is only social to share some of that in return for the help retaining it, acknowledging that you couldn't acquire and maintain it all by yourself.
greenyoda 12y ago
It's irrational because the 10 minutes of work that doesn't destroy the door is worth much more than the hour of work that does - replacing a door is expensive and costs the homeowner additional time and aggravation. Also, it's really more than 10 minutes of work, since the locksmith has to spend time driving to and from the customer. His fee needs to cover his travel time and expenses (gas, wear and tear on his truck, insurance, etc.). So $70 for a 10 minute house call doesn't seem unreasonable.
- rev_bird 12y ago
  I'm with you on the first point, but your second seems to undermine the first. The argument isn't "$70 per hour is reasonable, and a 10-minute call takes an hour." As far as I can tell, it's whether "Fixing the lock is not worth less because it took less time, the end result is what you pay for" is true.
- derekp7 12y ago
  Not only that, but you have to also account for the time that the locksmith spent learning the craft. And the opportunity cost of that learning/practicing time.
  - vkjv 12y ago
    This. While common in many fields, I feel that this is most obvious with musicians. "What? I'm not paying this band $1000 for a 2 hour performance!" When, in reality, you are paying them for many hours of practice in order to prepare for that 2 hour performance as well.

by Iv 12y ago

javert 12y ago

No, people get angry at being charged $70 for 10 minutes of work because they think they're getting cheated, even though in this case they aren't. You're not going to find your rationalization for socialism here.

jacalata 12y ago
And why do they think they're getting cheated?
- wolfgke 12y ago
  Because the hourly rate looks very high.

anaolykarpov 12y ago

It seems more rational to look at things as having your doorlock fixed, because that is why you call for the locksmith. You don't call just to see someone doing his job for the sake of it.

vegedor 12y ago
You call the locksmith because you want to get inside your shelter, having the door fixed is just a utility to get there. Your home is where you feel secure, and it is only social to share some of that in return for the help retaining it, acknowledging that you couldn't acquire and maintain it all by yourself.

greenyoda 12y ago

It's irrational because the 10 minutes of work that doesn't destroy the door is worth much more than the hour of work that does - replacing a door is expensive and costs the homeowner additional time and aggravation. Also, it's really more than 10 minutes of work, since the locksmith has to spend time driving to and from the customer. His fee needs to cover his travel time and expenses (gas, wear and tear on his truck, insurance, etc.). So $70 for a 10 minute house call doesn't seem unreasonable.

rev_bird 12y ago
I'm with you on the first point, but your second seems to undermine the first. The argument isn't "$70 per hour is reasonable, and a 10-minute call takes an hour." As far as I can tell, it's whether "Fixing the lock is not worth less because it took less time, the end result is what you pay for" is true.
derekp7 12y ago
Not only that, but you have to also account for the time that the locksmith spent learning the craft. And the opportunity cost of that learning/practicing time.
- vkjv 12y ago
  This. While common in many fields, I feel that this is most obvious with musicians. "What? I'm not paying this band $1000 for a 2 hour performance!" When, in reality, you are paying them for many hours of practice in order to prepare for that 2 hour performance as well.