Am I the only one who just noticed that it’s Wednesday? The holiday week with the free day is completely screwing me up.
Just to make this a relevant post:
Spend less!
Save more!
Invest!
Wee!
Delayed Gratification, Take II
How much would you pay for a kiss from the world’s sexiest celebrity?
That was the focus of a recent study that I can’t find today. There is no celebrity waiting in the wings to deliver the drool, and the study doesn’t name which celebrity it is. That’s an exercise for the reader.
This was a study into how we value nice things.
The fascinating part of the study is that people would be willing to pay more to get the kiss in 3 days than they would to get the tongue slipped immediately.
Anticipation adds value.
Instant gratification actually causes us to devalue the object of our desire.
This goes well beyond “Will you respect me in the morning?”
The last time I talked about delayed gratification, it was in the context of my kids. That still holds true. Kids don’t value the things that are handed to them.
The surprising–and disturbing–bit is that adults don’t, either. If I run out to the store to buy an iPad the first day I see one, I won’t care about it nearly as much as if I spend a week or two agonizing over the decision.
The delay alone adds to the perceived value. The agony turns the perceived value into gold.
If I spend a month searching for the perfect car, the thrill of the successful hunt adds less value than the time it took to do the hunting.
Here’s my frugal tip for today: Delay your purchases. While it may not actually save you any money, you will feel like you got a much better deal if you wait a few days for something you really want.
Does Amanda Bynes Need a Conservatorship?
The publicly documented downward spiral of Amanda Bynes may be reaching its breaking point. She has been on psychiatric lockdown for the past three days, and her parents are petitioning for conservatorship in California
on the grounds that they believe she is suffering from acute schizophrenia. They claim that the troubled starlet is unable to make safe decisions regarding her own well-being, not to mention the safety of others. The issue is complex, but the former childhood star has demonstrated that she meets the criteria to have external guardians instated to protect her from unpredictably irrational behaviors.
This development is the latest in a long saga of antics for Bynes, and the recent news report inserts a tragic twist into her somewhat comedic downfall. She had a pristine public persona only a year ago; however, at this time, she was caught publicly smoking marijuana. No one expected this incident to escalate, and it was treated like an innocent youthful infraction; however, the act recently turned criminal when she was reported for smoking in the lobby of her apartment complex.The comedian ran from the arriving police officers, and hurled a large cannabis apparatus out of a skyscraper window. The water-pipe was never found, but it presumably shattered upon impact. Bynes was incarcerated by the New York Police Department. During this time, the actress accused law enforcement of sexual assaulting her in a very lewd manner. Her absurd claims were never substantiated. The case against her is pending, and she has been evicted from her residence.
This was not the first criminal case against Bynes; she is also dealing with hit-and-run allegations in California. It was also not her last interaction with the police. Most recently, the actress doused an elderly woman’s driveway in gasoline and set it ablaze. She accidentally covered a puppy in the flammable liquid, so she ran down the block looking for something to save the animal from catching fire. After ransacking a convenience store, officers accosted her. The exchange resulted in the psychiatric hold that has been placed on Bynes.
Unfortunately, grounds for conservatorship can be exceedingly challenging to meet. Clear proof of mental illness needs to provided, and the standards are rigidly strict; however, if anyone has showcased the fanatical craziness that constitutes a lack of personal responsibility, it is Amanda Bynes.
Her schizophrenia is no longer dormant. The actress has become obsessed with plastic surgery, and she has deformed her face with cheek piercings. She uses online social networks to decry public figures for their ugliness. Victims of this attack include even Barack and Michelle Obama. Furthermore, she makes offensive sexual remarks towards rappers, and she wants to be a hip-hop artist herself. She has spent fortunes on a wig collection, and she employs a different style at every court appearance. The actress even used one as a disguise for an incognito trip to a trampoline emporium.
Anyone that has seen her Nickelodeon program would not be shocked to learn that she was schizophrenic. The role had her switching between dozens of identities for different skits, and she even played a character that was, in effect, obsessively stalking the star herself. “The Amanda Show” was neurotically fast-paced. Ultimately, the entire program can now be viewed as an eerie foreshadowing to the budding of a latent psychological disorder. If the legal standards of insanity are not met, then she will be free to wreak havoc on herself and others.
Sunday Roundup
My girls have been riding in horse shows lately. Sometimes, it seems like that’s all we’ve been doing on the weekends, but they love it. My wife’s favorite hobby now matches my daughters’ favorite pastime. As a bonus, we’ll never have to paint their room again, with the way they are accumulating ribbons.
Best Posts
It is possible to be entirely too connected.
My life is now complete. It’s possible to buy 95 pounds of cereal marshmallows for just $399. Breakfast at my house just got perfect.
I wholeheartedly agree with Tam, “You don’t need to make any excuses for crashing things into each other at the speed of light in an underground tunnel longer than Manhattan that’s had the air pumped out and been chilled to a couple degrees above absolute zero. That doesn’t need a reason. “
Carnivals I’ve Rocked
Credit Cards: My Failed Experiment was included in the Best of Money Carnival, the Carnival of Wealth, and the Totally Money Blog Carnival.
My niche site article on how to Make Extra Money with Keyword Research was included in the Totally Money Blog Carnival.
Thank you! If I missed anyone, please let me know.
Human Interaction
Life may be like a box of chocolates, but it is certainly not a game of Sorry, where one person wins at the expense of all others. It is entirely possible for everyone to win in most voluntary interactions.
For example, if my company gives me a $10,000 raise, it would seem like I win and they lose. I’m getting more money, at the expense of their bottom line, right? Maybe. But what if that raise spurs me on to make an extra $100,000 for the company? That makes it a good investment and a Win/Win scenario.
When I’m dealing with one of my side-business customers or an advertiser, I’m definitely pushing for the Win/Win. Of course I want them to pay me as much as possible, but I also want their repeat business, which won’t happen unless they walk away happy. If I insisted that each of my customers pay the absolute top dollar, I may come out ahead in the short-term, but what about next month or next year? It’s much better for both of us if we can find a happy middle ground.
The four basic forms of interaction are:
1. Win/Lose. This is where I win and you lose. Haha! The problem with a Win/Lose is that the loser isn’t going to come back to play next year. He’s not happy and he’ll probably tell his friends how unhappy he is. This is also the interaction that people are mistakenly assuming when they complain about excessive executive interaction. The CEO is making a million dollars while the folks on the assembly line are stuck with $15 per hour? It’s entirely possible that, if the CEO weren’t doing his job, nobody else would have one. That is, like it or not, Win/Win.
2. Lose/Win. This is where I give up everything, hoping you’ll eventually throw me a bone. It’s a cowardly interaction that won’t work well when dealing with someone playing #1. I’ll keep giving, you’ll keep taking. You go home happy, I go home sore. When it’s done, I won’t do business with you ever again.
3. Lose/Lose. Nobody wins. We fight so hard to get what we want, forcing the other side to give up as much as possible, while they are doing the same. At the end of the day, the hatred is flowing so strong, there’s no possibility of a relationship.
4. Win/Win. Yay! Everybody wins! Everybody’s happy! This will involve some compromise, but hopefully we can reach the happy middle ground where we are both smiling. If I’m looking for a deal that involves you paying me $1000 per month, is it better for me to push to get exactly that, or let myself get talked down to $750? If the $1000 is more than you can afford, so you quit with hard feelings after one month, the ongoing $750 is much, much better for both of us. It is actually in my greedy self-interest to give up that 25% to build our relationship.
Winning doesn’t have to be done at the expense of others. If you do it right, we all win.
Resolving Legal Disputes
Dispute resolution has to do with the impartial rectification of conflict between individuals or parties. More specifically it is the utilization and execution of methods that are designed to resolve conflicts. In a case in which there is a dispute between people or groups, often times a third, neutral, party is selected to be an impartial representative for the disputing persons. Although dispute resolution can refer to resolutions both in and out of the court, it mainly applies to disputes that are settled outside of the legal framework of the judicial system.
Two of the most common types of dispute resolution are known as adjudicative and consensual. While adjudicative resolution requires a third party to mediate the outcome, such as a judge or jury, and usually involves some form of litigation, consensual resolution is the attempt to solve the issue between the two disputing parties without involving a third party, although at times a neutral arbitrator will be selected to preside over the case, though they will often be there not so much for authoritative purposes but more as a council to keep things fair. There is also a third upcoming type of dispute resolution, online dispute resolution, or ODR, which has become more popular in recent years with the rise of the internet’s prominence in daily life, but it is mainly the application of traditional consensual resolution practices, only adapted to the online environment.
Many disputes can be solved simply through adherence to the law, however, sometimes issues arise that the legal structure isn’t equipped to handle, and so a third party is chosen to resolve the conflict. These types of conflict fall within the jurisdiction of the law and so will be relegated to the political system for arbitration. Judicial resolutions are conflicts that will be, hopefully, settled by the court. In the United States, this is often the case with dispute resolution. This form of resolution usually involves litigation. This is the use of outside individuals to argue for or against the disputing parties. In a courtroom, the lawyers are the litigators, while the judge and jury listen to the arguments in order to come to their decisions.
Extrajudicial resolution is non-court settlement of conflict. Also known as alternative dispute resolution, or ADR, this is what people are usually referring to when discussing dispute resolution. ADR is usually more efficient, cost effective, and less time consuming than judicial resolutions. Extrajudicial resolution concerns various types of ways to settle conflict. These include arbitration and mediation. In arbitration neutral individuals will listen to both sides of an argument and render a decision based on evidence. Unlike the court systems, this proceeding doesn’t necessarily include a binding agreement with the parties.
Mediation is used in extrajudicial resolution as a way to open a dialogue between conflicting parties. The idea is to use a trained neutral third party in order to come up with unique solutions to solve the issue. A mediator is trained to be both an effective negotiator as well as an excellent communicator. A mediator is like a judge in that they cannot take sides, and they do not give legal advice either. Their decisions are not obligatorily followed, though they tend to be followed since the mediators are trained to make decisions that benefit both parties.
The techniques used in dispute resolution can be used both in and outside of the court room. It is often used by individuals who wish to speed up the process by not having to get into the political system. However, they are useful in many cases where individuals wish to come to the most beneficial agreement for all the parties involved.
