Why Harvard Graduates Chose Lesser Economics - Robert Grant
Vložit
- čas přidán 24. 05. 2022
- #shorts #moneymotivation
Watch Next ✅ - • You Either Say I'm Don...
This video does not belong to The Minded Mentor; it has been modified and published solely to raise awareness, and if the rights Holder (visual/audio) of this content has any concerns, we request that you send a direct message to this page so that we can resolve the situation.
Thank you for your time.
The Minded Mentor
__________
Follow Us on Instagram - / themindedmentor
"The modern economy isn't driven by greed, it's driven by envy."
-Charlie Munger
it doesnt have to be one or another, its starter by envy and finished off by greed
Lies again? NASCAR GrabCar USD SGD
Yeah that aged well today
Bruh they really took 160k over 200k 😂
They are not like you
@@Smart_Sohamwe should be more like him then
@@jeniusguy3540bro you think you're sounding 'uncommon and smart' but whatever you just said was plain stupid. Reevaluate your reply please
@@jeniusguy3540the question was not to provide every guy in the world a salary of 200k, but just a select few along with the students. That isn't a number big enough to cause changes in the value of dollar lmao
@@Smart_Soham they don't know me son
“I’m not winning if someone’s not losing”
- Dodgeball movie
The zero sum mindset is for the selfish
@@lynako2546Nice guys finish last. The zero sum G R I N D S E T is for winners. 🦾❤️😸
What part of the movie is that? Must’ve been White Goodman😂
After graduating from Harvard, I would really hope that I make what I earn that has nothing to do with anybody else, but I know that everybody else will earn a lot because we have the same education
Are you harvard business school students@@Literallyarealhuman
I’ll choose 200k I don’t care about others , plus 20k difference is less than 40k loss …
More money doesn't mean more value
There’s a reason why you’re not at harvard
@@hellheaven4167in this case it does. More money = more money. This scenario isnt enough to change the value of the dollar
@@Red-Rocket221 I know it not gonna to make any change but it's smart minds
now think of this figures in billion or trillion if you want and the 87% of other people are more capable of you
So they chose less money cause theyre egos cant handle someone having more than them
Maybe they choose A because if let's say all that people earn 220k then, perhaps the inflation may rise especially in the city where most Harvard graduates would want to work. I know you can say few people earning 20k more than you will not make inflation rise. But we are just speaking from a hypothetical pov. Earning less than most people may make your value seems less when you want to change job. After a certain years, 160k and 200k wouldn't make that much of a difference in terms of spending or worth. A 200k and 300k would. There's a difference between money and value.
@@riyahayden4292 you think a few hundred people are going to single-handedly change inflation...
@@georgesmithers5999 not of the entire country but may be mainly the top job opportunity cities. Like how the rental price or even food sometimes differs per state.
Harvard is hard to get into, most Harvard students are extremely competitive and egotistical
Why else would they go to harvard
After graduating from Harvard, I would really hope that I make what I earn that has nothing to do with anybody else, but I know that everybody else will earn a lot because we have the same education
I don't tell people my salary, and I don't ask theirs. I'm happy getting more money even if I'm low man.
This is like getting a 200,000 salary and paying $40,000 each year to make sure everyone else is capped at $150,000. Over ten years that is $400,000 you walked away from.
You think harvard graduates with their rich parents give a single F about 400k?
The issue is there’s implied inflation in the question, which they probs considered
Yes, I was about to come here say this too. Perhaps they realized scenario A has better economical scenario overall in society rather than who is ”winning”. Just another ”study” here making economic students stereotypically selfish. But to be fair this same study could be asked from almost any group with this same result for scenario A (but without understanding of inflation etc).
Almost a good point… but the hypothetical was for a single class… that’ll hardly make a dent on inflation
You make more than the average Harvard graduate or less is probably how the question came across
I had to listen 2x because i thought i heard it wrong😅.... Who tf cares what other people are making.. show me that cheddar.. "Comparison is the thief of JOY"
Thats cuz if u earn more than the entire class of HBS means your somebody and you can go far
I think it might be because, even though the nominal money ($200k) is more in scenario B, if everyone else is getting more, then the real value of that money will be less. This is because, everyone will have more money, their demand will increase, which will cause the prices and hence inflation to rise. So, the real value of that 200k would be less. And it might turn out that if enough people are there getting more than them at $200k, the real value of the $160k in scenario A might be of more value/may have higher purchasing power.
I thought like that for a second but then again he said the average salary of the graduates which will have close to no effect.
I think it’s what would make myself consider it, such as, being judged for being under standards that were set for these people, so in my conclusion it’s ego of people that proven to achieve a lot making their ego probably also above average
@@user-sy3xb9ty7cMaybe its the other way around? Because thousands of graduates cannot have significantly less income per output collectively by chace so the inflation of the counrty must've been high in condition b.
That’s not enough to cause any economic shift so no
If I am better paid than others (market rate) then it will look good on my resume. I GET MORE BECAUSE I AM BETTER, therefore pay me some more.
@@Dantm928 exactly. If all Harvard students are paid like that, by inference you know the rest of the market, and logically it represents the inflation perspective. The scenario A is not about greed vs your peers, it is a logical choice for more value.
1. Prime example of behavioral economic theory
2. The answer to this also has to do with long-term inflation and long-term salary because you don't want to be less than average and have lots of inflation
Can u explain more😭😭
buddy a few individuals getting 200k or 220 ain't gonna do much to our economy
@@athuljose7107 buddy, I covered that in point 2. learn to read and understand instead of being an ignoramus nuisance on the internet.
@@Andalusian_ fair enough bud
Inflation sucking our soul, for example
here in the Philippines, Milo is just 7
pesos, A milo sachet back in the day
now its 12 pesos 🗿 bro's increase his
height more than i increase mine.
( I'm 5"2 I have every right, every reason to
became a villain )
Imagine this scenario. If you are better than others then top companies will hire you, you get best of everything, government wants you with them to make policies.
If you are last, then there is some problem in you. You might have a hbs degree but no future perks out of it.
The winner gets all is up there. They don't serve mediocrity up there in the top 1 percent.
This is what I was thinking but all the other comments seem to be more analytical about the economic value rather than what it says about how well-versed you are in your subject in comparison to others
A lot of people at Harvard are rich… even if their income is less than yours, they can ask their parents for more money than you. Most of them could cover that 10k difference with a single phone call to their parents just choose the 200k
Salary also reflects inflation and economic situation. Thus, $200k a year could be lower than $160k since it is lower than average salary and vice versa. The worth of the money changes under different inflation rates.
“ Excess of demand over supply causes inflation “
~ A harvard student
Ego vs Money thats why 87% chose A. They let their Ego controls over the $.
Scenario a makes sense from the standpoint of one upsmanship
A lot of people are missing the key word: “on average” which is present in both scenarios.
If you’re in group A and are making 160 relative to the AVERAGE of 150, you’d only typically be in the upper 40% or so of class earners if we assume a normal distribution.
In group B with your earning being 200 relative to the AVERAGE of 220, I’d assume a similar situation due to the normal distribution curve but just flipped- you’d be in the lower 40% of earners for the class.
Bottom line is you aren’t beating everyone in scenario A, and not everyone is better than you in scenario B. With the value of dollar being constant, I don’t see why anyone wouldn’t choose B.
@ExcisionsX You're over thinking this. He explained it to you in the video. They want to make more than the rest of their class. It doesn't matter the amount or the logic. Fundamentally, they are driven by having more than the rest not having more for themselves.
See,that doesn't matter... Because 40k a year is a good chunk of money...Even If I'm down 20k from the others of group A I wouldn't be unhappy about it..I can invest and grow it more because I'll be having more than I could If I was choosing B..Besides,being the bottom G in the top 40% club is pretty good for you even in this age inflation...and It's not money that brings happiness but it's what you can do with money that...More money means I can live a bit more comfortably
So I guess It's not at all a loss
You must be a Harvard alumni
Reputation is more important than money
There is a interesting paper about this. Basically saying that people hate being disadvantaged compared to others more than being ahead in the same situation.
If you earn more than your peers, then you have better purchasing power even though you are quantitatively earning less money.
No, it’s the prestige. It’s the honour. It’s the high end thing that you got . Everything can’t be bought with money.
It's not enough that I should succeed. Others must fail.
I would choose A because it has potential to keep bringing money in rather than having it right now
I’d pick A just cause the latter is probably a way more stressful position
Its all about doing relatively better than peers
Quintessential Harvard mentality
My mom says the importance is: can you handle the job at $220k vs having the the job at $160k as a new grad?
If you ain't first, you're last
- Ricky Bobby (and Ricky Bobby's Dad)
Defining attitude of modern economic climate
When everyone else makes more money than you, your buyability eventually becomes less. After all assets in that society is constant. This basic thing shaped our mind of getting better than others rather than focusing on myself only.
No actually if more people have more money the money will be less valuable if less people have more money then the money has value smart call by harvard students
That would apply on a larger scale not on the earnings of just Harvard graduates…
That only applies if the govt prints more money because of the higher salary. To get $200k to have the same value as $180k, the govt would to print an additional 10% over the base money supply. If the govt changes the money supply by that amount, you'd best emigrate.
If you are in top 1 percent of the class then all top companies want you with unlimited opportunity.
If you are last then no company wants you. Maybe inflation is also high so that money is no good.
They chose A to make sure that their economy was the strongest economy in the room.. no one wanted to be the weakest link even if it mean having more money. That’s what a lot of investment firms strive for, power and control.
The better choice is of course A, the B is a situation of inflation and your own poverty 😅 You can't evade inflation in real life, and you should not make unreal supposition for real life lesson 😊
87 percent of them were right as the purchasing power and style of living will be better with option A when compared to the peers. 😂
20k difference is less impactful than 40k loss
Its not enough to change the value of the dollar though
but maybe they thought in the context of thats the norm, like everyone else is getting higher pay @@Red-Rocket221
Glad...someone finally speaks English
exactly what i was thinking. does this professor know about his field ? lol@@TVS...l-_-l...
first they are not smartest but rather privileged
🧢
But fr in the first try, i chose 200k, but after i thought a lot, it is better to be on top, but with lower money, you feel me???
If you're taking the perspective of "Having" and wanting to maximise welfare with the subset, any rational economist would choose option B as you are maximising your own position.
Economist are not all the same, the elite who comes to these top-tier schools are also more prone to ideology and left-leaning bias, this is supported by the fact economics is very much intertwined with politics in today's age.
I prefer A too
it's about value not amount
Money in Money out!
They've chosen right. Purchasing power parity wise they are richer with scenario A than B
Because it will increase cost of living and the 200k dollars relative price less than 160🎉
So I'm doing my undergrad in economics and i did the behavioral economics course. People choosing option A is what we see every other day in different situations because every individual wants to be better off compared to another. But there's still my utility maximization, and my utility lies in the $20000, because by getting less than others I'm getting more myself. I'll gladly choose option B without thinking much.
no they chose the smart move. you knoww money has value, its not just paper. and its just a replacment for rare things that humans value and do trade. if you have more of it then anyone esle than you are on the clear, but if you have it less than other people , you will strugle. no matter what the amount, dollar, millions or billions they are just numbers.
yeh thats what i thought. i feel like he didnt give a lot of context, information was missing, yet he blamed the students for getting the question 'wrong'
that's such 1 dimensional thinking
no thats 3d thinking bro @@friendsfrenz1944
He said all dollars are constant. The money a class of Harvard graduates earn is not enough to inflate the currency.
first, he totally made that incident up. second, the population is not simply your classmates, when you get the $200,000 It's relative value to the entire population
I Dreamed A professor like that.
I’m nowhere near University or College in terms of intelligence, but I would rather take option B, because it’s a big chunk of money and I would continue to focus on myself and forge my economic path even further than to worry about others as competition, resulting in unnecessary envy which can cloud both my focus and judgement to try and achieve further success.
If inflation is held equal that of course choose 200k. But there is an implication that "everyone" is making 220. So you are making below average. In the other scenario 160k is above "everyone" therefore has more relative buying power.
Companies are ready to pay the majority of cohort 220k means the global economy is suffering Inflation. His point will be valid when the prevailing situation in both the choices are the same.
Most people value status very highly
Good job🎉🎉
Would you rather be with a girl who’s a 6 and all your friends have girlfriends who are 5’s,
OR be with a girl who’s a 7, while all of your friends have girls who are 8’s?
I'd rather not have a girlfriend if I'm more attracted to my friends then my own
@@BENNY-THE-DOG That doesn’t answer the question. I’m curious to know why you couldn’t just replace the term “girlfriend” with “partner,” and then answer.
It’s not really that surprising. Spend a bit of time with MBA students. It’s easy to see that they’d get more personal utility from out earning their peers than they would the extra $40k.
I remember that this was different and the students had chose A because of different reasons and I think he misremembered or said something wrong about the equation because it doesn't make sense for students to get 160k instead of 200k. Only those graduated in that year is not going to change economy for us to talk about inflation or other matters
I still ain’t got my 4acres & a mule 😂but he’s right we take a lesser evil for peace ☮️ of mind & family
I m not surprised at all. They got into Harvard because they were competitive
They are competitive. Not survivors.
More money will eventually increase the price of commodity
They considered inflation which is smart of them
I haven’t gone to a university and would’ve been the 20% who knows how that would positively impact our economy
The reason behind it is not just about some grand 😂😂. Students imagine a scenario where they accept beginners level salary is 150000 but they are getting more as their skills matter more . 😂
If he say them both of these A and B scenario are happening at the same time, then they would have probably chosen option B 😂 he thinks students are stupid but ourself asking stupid question without elaboration.
Aaa, it is not about economics. It is about relating money to status.
Bruh I don’t need to go to Harvard to understand I’m taking that 200k FOH
It’s not ego it’s logic.. wealth is relative. For example, if you increase your total asset less than the inflation rate, you’re basically getting poor every year compared to others. They chose A because they getting richer relatively, instead of B where you get poorer every year within the assumptions.
i think they interpreted the question differently tho
Pride is a mf,
I’ll
Take B all day , because i can network with people who have equal or more money then me , and I’d be helping someone. And logically the amount of money someone else has does not determine success. That’s why personal goals are important for personal development.
Solutions to problems create wealth.
If dollar is constant i will choose B, but if dollar value is allowed to fluctuate due to inflation and the salary presented is equal to majority, im going to choose A.
Its just greedy. They didn’t learn Economics they learned business.
(Remember he said all dollars are equal, meaning 200 Can buy you more than 160 no matter what others make)
This is an economically rational decision if the 87% get more utility out of out earning their peers than they would from the extra $40k. Economics isn’t just about money…
@@willmichael4033I think we mean the same thing. The reason they (the 87%) chose option A is (i agree) because they get more "utility" from that. But the only reason they get more utility is because they are self centered and want comparativly more for themselves. In other words, they are greedy.
@@willmichael4033utility of what? If they don't trade with one another, that utility is moot. This is not a zero sum game
Well they need to be making more than everyone else they are supposed to be elite. Why go there for the contacts to come out button barrel?
They are brilliant, even if it's not intentional. What happens when more money competes for the same goods? Inflation, therefore, the additional pay may not be higher. This on my makes sense in a petri dish.
Another way to put this is would you rather be slightly lower class in 2023 or upperclass in 1850?
Which will make you happier?
Chances are, most people would choose upperclass in 1850 even if they don't have access to modern day things, because it's not about what you have/don't have, it's about what you have/don't have relative to others (unfortunately) that makes you happier or not
No one in their right mind would choose upper class in 1850s.
B . as business , I could get more Capitol if people had more to spend on my produce .
There are two economies. Each person earns average salary of 150000 and that's their purchasing power and you get more purchasing power than others. In second situation, everyone except you have more purchasing power. If everyone can use 220000 dollars then that economy has higher inflation rate then the first one,means scenerio a is a good choice, maybe.
Isn't money and value relative though? If everyone has more than you then you aren't rich. If everyone has less than you then you are. Also, isn't it quite normal for students to compare with their classmates and direct contemporaries rather than the average of a population or some other far removed statistic? Depending on what is considered, $160K in one scenario may seem more valuable than 200K in another in terms of purchasing power. Ego probably isn't the main thing they were thinking about.
Because of negative perspective discerning the naughts if naught means naught then in the negative they get 61 not 2 or their reading right to left the Chinese students were probably in the 13 percentile it just goes to show that ai has moved to the corporeal state these are dangerous times
They would rather make $150 than $200? That’s just plain dumb.
They did not understand game theory , sunk cost theory , and probably price discrimination too .
If everyone else earns more than you, then indirectly your purchasing power decreases. If your salary doubles and rests' salary triples, you would be poor. Harvard students made the right decision.
True word
Take the 200k and spend some of it on an investment or service provider to get that 220k that the others have
I mean it depends. Is ur pay higher than the rest because you are doing something that is more important which others can’t? So in that way 160k may have more leverage than even 200k because it shows that you’re more important to the workplace, thus you can probably negotiate for a higher salary if switching companies.
they dont mention other variables whats the average starting salary.. you always want to be making more than average. if the starting salary is 150k for business schools..then scenerio b of course. this guy is just trying to talk like he has a purpose for being on stage really his just nonsense
Money loses value when abundant. If all other students get $220k, your $200k wouldn’t be worth as much. If they all get $150k, your $160k will be worth as much. It’s about purchasing power and the value of the dollar, not the number itself without relating it to the external world. Money is relative.
I will choose A - in real world A is right option to choose , believe it or not
When you make less than people around you , you will see their real faces - which no one should see - no matter how honest , smart and hardworking you are but if you are making less than them they will disrespect you, you will be excluded from their circle and more things that cant be explained
If you can't win then try not to loose
You have more purchasing power with A
Relative to the other HBS students in that particular graduating class? Yes. But compared to the city they work in after graduating? No, because the graduating class of about 1000 or so is far less than the size of any major city, and in any case it's not like the entire class is going to one city. The effect on the purchasing power that actually matters, which is the purchasing power of the locality they end up in, is negligible.
@@kenlandon6130the math is still slightly in their favor as A provides them with a 6.25% advantage relative to other HBS grads which for this exercise we can assume would be top 1-5% of salaries in US. In option B they would be demoted down to a 10% Disadvantage and in total be sacrificing purchasing power of 16.25%. Now the second assumption is that corporate life requires one to live in a more expensive area already so given the fact they would already be paying top dollar for average living expenses they would probably want to hold onto that 16.25% in purchasing power amongst the top 1-5% percent of the US
You would need much more information than what is given in the example it depends on the overall inflation not just salaries of one class
@@Jeter23advantage of what purchasing? If it’s a business school then they should be viewing other peoples money as potential income also…
Brain dead comment. He literally said that the dollar value was constant in both scenarios.
I'm struck by the originality and creativity of this content. A similar book I read inspired significant changes in my mindset. "Game Theory and the Pursuit of Algorithmic Fairness" by Jack Frostwell
40k less over pride ... show's the difference between age
They chose high hierarchy over other....
I believe there are all sorts of trick questions and weird and unusually ways of looking at life that can deceive us. Surely a Harvard Graduate who is in the Business School is smarter than that on reflection. If you really think about earning $160,000 vs $200,000 there is no contest.
they are just more rich
Well it shows that so much Prestige and study is not worth what you learn in real Life anyway
The president of Harvard is a Haitian immigrant who is solely focused on minorities and power so this study makes complete sense. You’d be crazy to hire a Harvard grad. It’s a misnomer they’re clever. Atleast 30% of students have a gpa of 2.0 or less. They just have to fit into a minority column specifically black, Islamist and transgender
I thought he was going to say for tax reasons
In first look like elon musk brother.
No its about showing off am the big man
I'ma Go With Scenario B
I was trying to think of a way to justify taking A. Like, “others having more money might drive up the cost of everyday items,” or something like that, but no, business students are just dumb.
Why ppl buy expensive houses 🏘️