Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
669 bytes added ,  17:58, February 13, 2007
no edit summary
Line 11: Line 11:     
--[[User:BenjaminS|BenjaminS]] 12:38, 9 February 2007 (EST)
 
--[[User:BenjaminS|BenjaminS]] 12:38, 9 February 2007 (EST)
 +
 +
Good point Ben.  Also, remember that money really has no inherent value- it must be exchanged before it is useful to anyone except perhaps a coin collector.  Thus, by giving someone a useful item as a gift rather than money, you are sparing the receiver of the gift the transaction costs involved in exchanging money for that item.  So if we assume (1) that the giver knows what gift the reciever wants, (2) that the reciever would consider it a chore to take the neccesary steps to obtain the gift, and (3) that the giver will not mind, or perhaps even enjoy, taking those same steps, then the traditional mode of gift giving becomes economically rational.
 +
-Chris J
    
:2) Consider a company whose stock pays no dividends, and whose management's states that their intention is not to pay them in the future. The present value of a future stream of zero dividends is zero. How does economic theory explain why people are willing to buy such stock? [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 16:39, 8 February 2007 (EST)
 
:2) Consider a company whose stock pays no dividends, and whose management's states that their intention is not to pay them in the future. The present value of a future stream of zero dividends is zero. How does economic theory explain why people are willing to buy such stock? [[User:Dpbsmith|Dpbsmith]] 16:39, 8 February 2007 (EST)

Navigation menu