- everytime you earn more, save more.
- monthly saving is difficult, present bias (immediate gratification) makes you think of how you have to give up something now
- we think about saving in the present, but spend in the long run. We diet today, eat tomorrow
- speaks of checking the box during an organ donor situation in licence aquisition. Germany shortage - you have to check the box to say yes. Austria you have to check the box to say No... they have organs for Africa. In terms of saving... create a situation where people have to opt out. Opting out takes effort.
- if you say, Yes, I want to save, that's half of the effort. Next automate the process.
- if you defer saving to when you get a raise, then it's a small percentage of that extra
- making the decisions around saving are complex, too many points to consider
- 1 in 10 Americans save enough
- Singaporeans spend average $4000 per year on lotto. Americans $1000.
I don't think 'natural' is good. There are many things that we apply (some almost arbitrary) (some ignorant and backward ideas of natural and not-natural agenda-propagating) rules of morality. I think 'natural' is a political rhetoric, profoundly abused. 'Diversity' is the only defensible rhetoric for 'thinking' beings. We are not, of course, the only creatures that do thinking, but we are the only creatures with the power to oppress others and other creatures whose languages we don't understand. Us (badly) thinking creatures, slowly, ponderously gathering the evidence of our badness (I see no reason for your (god's) patience with us), have the ability to decide to be better than (the fashionable) 'natural' of the day. It is our responsibility to transcend our vileness. Just that. That one task. Our thinkingness I believe is for that. A world (constructed by god) to demonstrate this point. And we will find every rhetor...
Comments