But isn’t it odd that for a fundamental fact of human psychology, a huge bias we have spent a ton of collective time discussing and fighting, that it doesn’t seem to lead to much actual money-pumping? The obvious examples like the dieting or gambling industries are pretty small, all things considered.
I wonder if consumer credits qualify as an example of hyperbolic discounting. Basically, people are paying more for the same TV in order to get it faster. That is, a TV now is more valuable to them than the same TV later.
Seems to be more about misapplied non-linearity of money.
TV now should be higher utility than TV later (assuming TV has positive utility and you changing TVs more often than they break down completely): some of your viewing gets shfited from worse TV to a better one. Consumer credits seem to be long enough to come into the area where hyperbolic discounting does not overweight exponential discounting that much.
What gets stressed is that “Ah well, you pay just pocket change now, just pocket change later, just pocket change a few more times later...” And the full price of TV is a big chunk of cash, of course.
I wonder if consumer credits qualify as an example of hyperbolic discounting. Basically, people are paying more for the same TV in order to get it faster. That is, a TV now is more valuable to them than the same TV later.
Seems to be more about misapplied non-linearity of money.
TV now should be higher utility than TV later (assuming TV has positive utility and you changing TVs more often than they break down completely): some of your viewing gets shfited from worse TV to a better one. Consumer credits seem to be long enough to come into the area where hyperbolic discounting does not overweight exponential discounting that much.
What gets stressed is that “Ah well, you pay just pocket change now, just pocket change later, just pocket change a few more times later...” And the full price of TV is a big chunk of cash, of course.