And if you say they should work all the more so the poorer you are, because then you’ll have more to lose—well, I don’t want to say “check your privilege”, but… check your privilege.)
Sorry I don’t quite understand what you mean by “check your privilege” and how that constitutes a counter argument to the idea that commitment contracts should work all the more so if you are poorer. Could you explain?
Simply put, one’s willingness to engage in this sort of contract signals that you have the money needed to not really feel the loss, and a general lack of awareness of how much it sucks to actually feel the loss.
I don’t quite understand what you means here. I’ve always thought that commitment contracts work for me because I’m generally aware that losing money sucks, and when I lose money I can’t spend it on other things.
I agree that in some situations where you have very little money financial commitment contracts may not be the best idea. What do you think about commitment contracts that are based on social incentives rather than financial ones? or any other kind of commitment contract that isn’t based around money? eg. http://aherk.com/
Sorry I don’t quite understand what you mean by “check your privilege” and how that constitutes a counter argument to the idea that commitment contracts should work all the more so if you are poorer. Could you explain?
It’s a bit tongue-in-cheek, since “check your privilege” gets used a lot in some places by some folks that I really don’t like and avoid to associate with. It means that some aspects of other people’s normal existence just fly over your head because of some assumptions in your worldview that exist because you’ve been living a very sheltered life. It’s a bit like—well, I don’t want to say this either, because worst argument in the world and all that—rebellious teenagers thinking “Man, it would be pretty awesome to live on the streets and dumpster dive for a while, as a big “fuck you” to the establishment. It can’t be that bad—I’ll make do.”
In this context, said privilege in need of checking is the belief that poor people can and should spend their money like rich people do, if on a smaller scale, and that the fear of losing their money has a similar mostly positive impact on their mindsets as it does on rich people. It’s the privilege of precommitting to give away a large sum, and then fail, and then give it away, and then return to your normal life with a sense of loss, but no seriously ugly repercussions. And then preach it to other people, “regardless of their income”.
I agree that in some situations where you have very little money financial commitment contracts may not be the best idea. What do you think about commitment contracts that are based on social incentives rather than financial ones? or any other kind of commitment contract that isn’t based around money? eg. http://aherk.com/
Yeah, I thought about asking something like that in my original post, but forgot about it. For those who want to attempt something like this but aren’t quite swimming in cash, it would be a good idea to have some form of non-monetary incentive.
Sorry I don’t quite understand what you mean by “check your privilege” and how that constitutes a counter argument to the idea that commitment contracts should work all the more so if you are poorer. Could you explain?
I don’t quite understand what you means here. I’ve always thought that commitment contracts work for me because I’m generally aware that losing money sucks, and when I lose money I can’t spend it on other things.
I agree that in some situations where you have very little money financial commitment contracts may not be the best idea. What do you think about commitment contracts that are based on social incentives rather than financial ones? or any other kind of commitment contract that isn’t based around money? eg. http://aherk.com/
It’s a bit tongue-in-cheek, since “check your privilege” gets used a lot in some places by some folks that I really don’t like and avoid to associate with. It means that some aspects of other people’s normal existence just fly over your head because of some assumptions in your worldview that exist because you’ve been living a very sheltered life. It’s a bit like—well, I don’t want to say this either, because worst argument in the world and all that—rebellious teenagers thinking “Man, it would be pretty awesome to live on the streets and dumpster dive for a while, as a big “fuck you” to the establishment. It can’t be that bad—I’ll make do.”
In this context, said privilege in need of checking is the belief that poor people can and should spend their money like rich people do, if on a smaller scale, and that the fear of losing their money has a similar mostly positive impact on their mindsets as it does on rich people. It’s the privilege of precommitting to give away a large sum, and then fail, and then give it away, and then return to your normal life with a sense of loss, but no seriously ugly repercussions. And then preach it to other people, “regardless of their income”.
Yeah, I thought about asking something like that in my original post, but forgot about it. For those who want to attempt something like this but aren’t quite swimming in cash, it would be a good idea to have some form of non-monetary incentive.