Talk:Temporal discounting
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
 | The contents of the Temporal discounting page were merged into Time preference on 5 August 2017 and it now redirects there. For the contribution history and old versions of the merged article please see its history. |
Wrong example?[edit]
Shouldn't the example be the other way round: When offered 100$ today or 110$ tomorrow, then choose the 110$ tomorrow. And when offered 100$ today or 110$ in a year, then choose 100$ today. --193.134.202.252 (talk) 14:34, 30 March 2009 (UTC) e_l_
What about choosing the postponement of "indulgence"?
We should note that one of these illustration applies only to addiction (e.g. cigarette). A better illustration would be something that applies to more human beings.
Furthermore, the smoking example is poor in real terms because a smoker's addiction would be gone or at least significantly reduced after 6 months. The cigarette now actually is more valuable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.126.170.111 (talk) 09:56, 28 February 2012 (UTC)
Now, consider an alternate scenario: I'm not hungry now. I have a choice of eating now or in 45 minutes to an hour when I'm hungry. All things being equal, what do I choose?
Add the prospect of going out with a friend who may or may not be willing to renegotiate the time, I decide whether or not to eat now when I'm not hungry but to enjoy my friend's company or to eat later when I'm more likely to be hungry, when I may or may not be able to garner enjoyable company for the meal. MaynardClark (talk) 18:16, 15 April 2011 (UTC)