What’s worse: a world without Bach or a world without clean sheets?
What’s better: a dog or a cat? (A dog, obviously. Cats are a-holes)
Should toilet paper unroll from the top or the bottom?
These are the questions that lead to arguments and families splitting up, and they never end with a definitive answer because a definitive answer does not exist. It all comes down to personal preference (except for the dog or cat thing. Cats are a-holes).
It turns out there’s an all-new Reddit hypothetical making the rounds this week: “Would you take a 50/50 shot where you either get $5 million or die?”
Naturally, people are decidedly mixed on whether or not they would take the deal, and the disagreement over a correct answer has media outlets perplexed.
First, a little background:
This particular hypothetical is a variation of a puzzle from a book entitled “Can You Outsmart an Economist?: 100+ Puzzles to Train Your Brain” by Steven E. Landsburg.
The question posed by Landsburg is whether you would take a guaranteed $1 million or a 50/50 shot at $5 million or death.
The purpose of the hypothetical is to demonstrate that everyone has a different tolerance for risk. So while one person would prefer the guarantee at $1 million, someone with more risk tolerance would look to “maximize their value potential.”
So…
Editor’s Note: You know what? I had a point when I started this article, but I’m flooded with anti-biotics and barely capable of completing this post. Just listen to Hammer and Nigel debate this thing and it will make more sense to you.
https://omny.fm/shows/hammer-and-nigel-show/50-50-shot-5-million-dollars-or-death
