« Adam Smith on trade protection as rent seeking | Main | WIU soccer team advances to NCAA tournament »
November 6, 2006
Exam time and election time
Excuse the lack of posting. Last week, I took a group of students to compete in the "Fed Challenge" in Chicago. The Fed Challenge is a competition in which student teams present a summary of economic conditions, a short-term forecast, and a monetary policy recommendation to a panel of judges. Most teams structure their presentation as a mock FOMC meeting. I would tell you how we did, but I have not received the official results yet--all anyone knows is who made the final round and who won. I can tell you that we did not win--Northwestern University took that honor and will represent the 7th Federal Reserve District in Washington, D.C. at the national competition. However, our students learned a lot from the competition. This was also the first time that WIU has entered a team, and I picked up some valuable ideas for next year.
Last minute preparations and missing a day last week left me in "catch-up" mode, and due to some other obligations this weekend, I still have a day or so before I'm caught up. I have to grade some exams and write some exams--not the fun part of the job, but one of the obligations nonetheless. Normal blogging will resume shortly.
In the meantime, there's an election tomorrow. Here is a Slate piece by Steven Landsburg from 2004 and Tyler Cowen's response. I'm with Cowen on this one. People do not (often for good reasons) treat every decision as a rational optimizer. Sure, there's no payoff from voting, nor is there payoff from many of the things we do that seem to contradict utility maximizing theory. For example, I tip generously even when I know that I'll never be back at that restaurant. I call the highway patrol to report road hazards even when a rational person would figure that someone has already called it in. The latter is probably a pretty close analogy to voting. I'm doing something at a (very small) cost to me when I have every expectation that it doesn't matter for the outcome. I feel good about it, but that's not a satisfactory explanation. Putting warm fuzzy feelings in the utility function allows you to explain anything. I think it is more accurate to think of voting and other similar actions as a commitment to a social contract. Some people are more committed to the contract (willing to pay a higher cost to uphold it) than others. Those less committed free ride on those who are more committed. Years of observation suggests to me that the same is true on the public roadways.
So tomorrow, vote or don't. But if you don't, please do not pester me with this business of how it is irrational to vote. As for me, I plan to incur an extremely small cost to display my allegiance to the social contract.
Posted by William Polley at November 6, 2006 12:01 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.williampolley.com/cgi-bin/mt-tb.cgi/638
Comments
I'm voting tomorrow - and I'll try to vote fiscal responsibility wherever possible. Which means i'm voting no to most of those CAL propositions (including 87 even if Bill Clinton and Al Gore are for it) and I'm voting for the Democrat in our governor's race as ARNOLD is for more spending and no tax cuts. Alas, it's an exercise in futility as his free lunch promises have suckered most of California's voters. Then again - my bumper still has the Kerry '04 bumper sticker. Sort of my personal protest to George W. Bush's fiscal fiasco.
Posted by: pgl at November 6, 2006 1:43 PM