tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post5996687294314035729..comments2023-10-10T08:02:18.073-04:00Comments on Rationally Speaking: A Rational Case Against the Irrationality of TippingUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger132125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-43616580140498234072013-05-15T16:51:37.358-04:002013-05-15T16:51:37.358-04:00"...a wait-person has the potential to ruin a..."...a wait-person has the potential to ruin a very expensive dinner, an important meeting, date, birthday, reunion, etc. Good waiting is something very valuable culturally, and the tipping model incentivizes quality in that domain."<br /><br />How so? With the tipping culture being the way it is for so long, that potential would have disappeared? If you know you're guaranteed at least a 15% tip, where's the incentive to do your job any different? <br /><br />In my book, you either do your job right, or you don't. Ruining my dining experience should get you fired not get you tipped 15% instead of 25%. pailheadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00424619607417304073noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-44833072961299960342013-05-15T16:39:11.437-04:002013-05-15T16:39:11.437-04:00Thank you so much for this post.
I don't agre...Thank you so much for this post.<br /><br />I don't agree with the 20% increase in dish prices. It would be interesting to figure out why is this tip even calculated in percentage. <br /><br />It makes absolutely no sense, no matter how hard I try to make sense out of it....<br /><br /><br />So say for example that i'm working as a waiter in a restaurant. The restaurant has a fancy version of mac and cheese at say $20. It also has a lobster dish at $200. Wine ranges from $30 - $300 at this restaurant.<br /><br /><br />I work a night shift, and serve lets say 10 tables two people each. This one particular night, all my guests were college students, and they all ordered the cheapest meals, and the cheapest bottle of wine. Say the bill ends up being $100 a table. <br /><br />Thats a grand of food and beverage i served that night. I get 25% *because 15% is like completely offensive, i mean i need to remember a couple of dishes, a type of wine). <br /><br />So i make $250 that night and i'm super happy. People tipped me 25% on average, and thats a good tip right?<br /><br />But say that the patrons were a bit on the cheap side, everyone tipped the minimum 15%. So i made $100 and im kinda bummed out.<br /><br /><br />Now say that everyone orders two lobster dishes, sides appetizers and an expensive bottle of wine.<br /><br />I end up serving $8000 worth of food and beverage.<br /><br /><br />Now these are people that can afford meal like that and can afford to tip correctly. Plus i've done a good job so i get 25% in tips.<br /><br />I've made $2000 that night and im happy. Not because I made so much money, but because i made 25% of what i served.<br /><br />Ahhh... but say that there was an anomaly. All of the patrons that night, saved their entire lives and wanted to treat themselves to a nice dinner at my restaurant and can't really afford to tip that much, but want to try a lobster for once in their lives.<br /><br />They still tip, but say they are not familiar with the customs on top of everything, and tip according to how many trips i made to the table.<br /><br />Say they each leave a miserably 5% tip.<br /><br />I'm like "WTF? 5% that's an insult!"<br /><br />But then i count my money, and realize that i have $400 in my pocket.<br /><br />Then i go<br /><br />"WTF? This was a lousy night, people tipped 5% on average, but i still made almost double the money than last night when i made a killing on tips, i mean 25%!?"<br /><br /><br />Can someone explain this paradox to me?<br /><br />I would really appreciate it. <br /><br />I am an immigrant myself and have a hard time understanding this phenomenon. <br /><br />I think i've heard before that people complain how you don't get benefits. But this seems like profit sharing to me. <br /><br />A good chef creates great dishes, the owner paid an interior designer to design everything. Invested a ton of capital to lease the location, furnish it equip it etc. <br /><br />A waiter just drops in, comes and goes, MAKES NO INVESTMENT (no risk?) and every single one gets to share the success of the restaurant. Isn't this profit sharing model considered a huge benefit in other jobs?<br /><br /><br />I would calculate how many trips on average my waiters have to make at my restaurant. That would be a parameter indicating how hard my waiters work. Then i would consider how long it takes to turn a table, and that would indicate some sort of capacity. <br /><br />Combining those two, i could come up with an hourly rate that i would divide evenly and add to every dish. <br /><br />The way i look at things, a waiter is just carrying a plate or a glass and has to attach a name to it i.e. "expensive lobster dish" "cheap mac n cheese". But not even that maybe, he lists it all, turns it into numbers, those numbers get submitted to the kitchen, they come out as plates with stuff on it and glasses with liquid in it, and he brings it back to the appropriate table. Same amount of work, regardless of whats on the plate.<br /><br />But then again i'm foreign, and an architect (a poor one at that) i consider myself a rational being, and thats why i probably dont understand this.<br /><br />Please please please shoot an argument at citizens.arrest@gmail.com<br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br />pailheadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00424619607417304073noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-24991704958474070162012-04-20T18:24:22.586-04:002012-04-20T18:24:22.586-04:00What have criminal regulations got to do with tipp...What have criminal regulations got to do with tipping or tipping's got to do with fraud? In any case your arguments have boiled down to a grasping of delusional straws.<br />Civil regulations have to do with civil fraud, not criminal fraud. Civil fraud alone is not punishable by violence and/or imprisonment. An employee, for example, can get fined or fired. If he doesn't pay the fine, his assets can be attached, etc., etc., etc. Again, no debtors prisons, etc., etc. <br />I don't expect that you'll even try to understand this, as you're clearly blinded by some cockamamie ideology, and the thought of losing the argument here seems to unhinge you. So I'm answering for the sake of the audience, not for you.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07573847127040276949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-44746911867976710412012-04-20T17:20:13.870-04:002012-04-20T17:20:13.870-04:00Roy,
We are not even remotely talking about civi...Roy,<br /> We are not even remotely talking about civil regulations! We are talking about removing the tipping system. Which cannot be done with a civil regulation. We are talking about government regulation. <br /> I find it comical that you state you were hired by the state to Investigate these matters. What happens when you catch someone performing this fraud? Did you give the criminal a stain on their credit? So even your presence in the civil matter is about force.<br /> Regardless, the point is, you cannot remove tipping without the force of the state (yes Roy, once again, meaning threat of violence or imprisonment). Otherwise it would not work. All federal and state regulation is enforced in the same manner. Why your insistent to try and change the debate toward civil matters, I don't know? We are discussing removing tipping. It is impossible to do without threat of force (same damn meaning as usual Roy) if it can, you have failed miserably to explain how!Jim Fisherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16928807367473160898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-75251856611640740432012-04-16T13:33:48.497-04:002012-04-16T13:33:48.497-04:00If force always meant threat of imprisonment or vi...If force always meant threat of imprisonment or violence when you used it, then as I said initially, there are no such threats involved in most civil regulations. There are certain federal regulations that have criminal penalties, but the usual state codes don't add criminal penalties to civil matters. That's how successful con-men get away with fraud, they know where the line is and essentially use running up an unpaid debt as a way to steal. <br />I used to investigate those matters with an eye toward establishing there was criminal fraud involved instead of civil. But you'll never admit that you were wrong here, so this lesson will no doubt fall on deaf ears.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07573847127040276949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-65448213465713671552012-04-16T12:56:18.957-04:002012-04-16T12:56:18.957-04:00Roy,
Each and every time I used the term force, ...Roy,<br /> Each and every time I used the term force, I used it to mean threat of violence and or imprisonment. <br /> I am sorry if you thought I meant force as in F=MA kind of force, or perhaps you though I was talking about the Star Wars force.<br /> <br /> what I meant with the term force is obvious, but for some reason you keep trying to make a point that I am lying becuase I was not always using the term force in the same way. Please point out where I used it to mean something different?<br /><br /> You wont bother to answer this exact point as you havent bothered to answer anything. You are not interested in debating the point I am making becuase you made some foolish point about civil regulations that made no sense and have been soundly mistaken that somehow government regulation does not need force and is really civil regulation.<br /><br /> Roy, time to call it quits (at least I am). If you want to actually acknowledge the real substance of the argument, then I am happy to discuss if tipping can be removed by government without force (yes Roy,....that means threat of imprisonment or violence)Jim Fisherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16928807367473160898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-13902494421031217942012-04-13T13:24:52.163-04:002012-04-13T13:24:52.163-04:00To suit whatever rationalization supports your pre...To suit whatever rationalization supports your present argument, you change violence to force and back again. All of these shenanigans are forms of lying.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07573847127040276949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-57028184238604553252012-04-13T13:21:14.840-04:002012-04-13T13:21:14.840-04:00"what I am arguing is that you must comply or..."what I am arguing is that you must comply or force will be used against you." And here I had thought you were saying it was violence and imprisonment.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07573847127040276949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-14550489690896376532012-04-13T08:33:04.101-04:002012-04-13T08:33:04.101-04:00Ive tried to unlie a lie?
You dont even make a ra...Ive tried to unlie a lie?<br /><br />You dont even make a rational case for your aguement and for some reason keep calling me a liar, yet fail continuously to point out what I am lying aboutJim Fisherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16928807367473160898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-33858790913843808442012-04-13T08:31:16.090-04:002012-04-13T08:31:16.090-04:00The point of my posting the definition was to show...The point of my posting the definition was to show you that government regulation is not civil regulation which for some reason had to be a point of debate with you?<br /><br />The fact it is backed by force is just obvious. All you need to do is think it through Roy, which you have refused to do. What happens if someone takes a stand against a government regulation. Choose any government regulation Roy. Lets say the regulation is that you must paint your house red (it doesnt matter how trivial the regulation is). You decide to take stand Roy. You will not comply with this regulation becuase you feel its your house and you should be able to paint it any color you want. Your refuse to comply. And by refuse, that means in its entirety. You will not pay a fine, you will not comply with the regulation in any form whatsoever.<br /><br />What will happen Roy? According to you, it will just end up being a stain on your credit.<br /><br />what I am arguing is that you must comply or force will be used against you.<br /><br />So please, instead of bickering about civil regulation which has nothing to do with what we are talking about. Just do the thought experiment. Pick any government regulation and think it through, what happens when you take a stand and refuse to comply?<br /><br /> Most dont argue this point with me, because the answer is obvious. Its just obvious, if there was no backing of force, then regulation would be impossible. people wouldhave no reason to go against their own will. and if it was their own will, then there would be no reason for the regulation in the first place.<br /><br /> Your one of the first that has even argued this point with me. Even the most Liberal or conservative people understand this is a fact of statism. I am not sure why you refuse to see it.Jim Fisherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16928807367473160898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-70135604350975552522012-04-11T13:33:06.186-04:002012-04-11T13:33:06.186-04:00Even in your cited definition of government regula...Even in your cited definition of government regulation there is no mention of "threat of violence and/or imprisonment." <br />And you've tried to unlie a lie there as well. It can't be done.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07573847127040276949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-10326538452223229542012-04-11T07:34:29.468-04:002012-04-11T07:34:29.468-04:00Here is a decent definition of government regulati...Here is a decent definition of government regulation from the free dictionary.<br /><br />http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Government+regulation<br /><br />You are impossible to conversate with, because for one you dont understand my point "that all government regulation has the backing of force (meaning threat of violence and/or imprisonment), and two, you dont even understand your own point because you have mixed up all definitions of commonly used terms. And to top it off constantly insult my integrity by calling me a liar. <br /><br />when someone constantly insults the person they are debating with on a personal level, it is usually because the weight of their argument doesnt speak for itself so they search for something else.<br /><br /> as you say I am loosing credibility or embarrasing myself. if this were in the actual argument, then you dont need to say it. but because it is not in the substance of your argument, you feel the need to say it. If I am lying, point out the lie and tell me the truth. So far you have failed misirably at this. Your wiki link proves my point, not yours. It does not say that government regulation is civil regulation yet for some reason you feel it holds weight for your argument. It doesnt. Or perhpas you hoped no one would read it? I am not sure what you were thinking.<br /><br />And with your homeless man example. I have no idea what your point is???? I am not sure you do.<br /><br />the fact is, to remove tipping from the current free market system, some form of government law or regulation would need to be used (Not frigging Civil!, civil law has nothing to do with it!) and that law / regulation would have the backing of force (meaning the backing of the threat of violence and/or imprisonment). The reason the author of this piece didnt debate this, is becuase its true, the reason Val didnt go further, is becuase he saw the point and it is valid. for some reason you think government can make people go against their own will with no power of force (meaning no threat of violence and/or imprisonment). why Roy? Why would people listen to the government against their own will? <br /><br />Its the same reason we pay taxes we dont want to pay. same reason we renew a license we dont want to. The same reason someone doesnt open a store in their house if they dont have proper zoning and on and on.Jim Fisherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16928807367473160898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-59080891351983029622012-04-11T06:52:57.437-04:002012-04-11T06:52:57.437-04:00Roy,
You have called me a liar several times an...Roy,<br /><br /> You have called me a liar several times and go on to say "most government regulations are civil"<br /><br />I ask for just one example of a government regulation that is a "civil regulation"<br /><br />Rather than give me just one example (because there isn't any) you post a Wiki link for "civil code"<br /><br />If you would bother to read your own link, you would see that civil law applies to "private" parties. Civil law is that which is intended to set guidelines to resolve disputes between private parties.<br /><br />This is not the same as "Government regulations"<br /><br />If you indeed worked in 3 government regulated industries (as I currently do) then you know these government regulations have nothing to do with civil law or civil court. <br /><br />But please, despite this truth that for some reason either you don't understand or are Intentionally twisting, call me a liar again.<br /><br />Please point out my lie? As I have just pointed out yours (either an Intentional lie or you just dont understand , which it is I really don't care)<br /><br />Again Roy, please give me an example of a government regulation that is a civil regulation? You wont because there isn't any.<br /><br />You say you worked in 3 government regulated Industries. Just point out one rule from any of those 3 jobs that is a civil regulation. Should be pretty easy?Jim Fisherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16928807367473160898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-46834786109481249202012-04-10T13:44:33.432-04:002012-04-10T13:44:33.432-04:00http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_codehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_codeAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07573847127040276949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-47969272605165304442012-04-10T12:02:22.071-04:002012-04-10T12:02:22.071-04:00"most government regulations are Civil'
..."most government regulations are Civil'<br /><br />what the heck are you talking about. <br /><br />Please entertain me Roy, please tell me one government regulation that happens to be a civil regulation? this I really need to hear?Jim Fisherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16928807367473160898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-83862774501564960172012-04-05T18:42:30.608-04:002012-04-05T18:42:30.608-04:00Most government regulations are civil. I should k...Most government regulations are civil. I should know, I was a Federal investigator for over 20 years. Worked later in three government regulated industries. <br />No violators of civil rules and statutes were ever threatened with VIOLENCE or prison. <br />(Also worked as Police Commission investigator, and even those violators were seldom threatened with violence or jail time.)<br />And I know a liar when I see one and you're a poor one.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07573847127040276949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-6299949545764622562012-04-05T18:06:29.852-04:002012-04-05T18:06:29.852-04:00Civil regulations??
Are you going to try and tell...Civil regulations??<br /><br />Are you going to try and tell me we were discussing civil regulations?<br /><br />It was not perfectly clear I was talking about government regulation as were you when I said "government regulation" 10,000 times?<br /><br />You have a nice evening RoyJim Fisherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16928807367473160898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-8143701669205858282012-04-05T18:00:09.522-04:002012-04-05T18:00:09.522-04:00But perhaps in your libertarian logic you see all ...But perhaps in your libertarian logic you see all force as violent. Pity.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07573847127040276949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-29964900899900590052012-04-05T17:57:56.118-04:002012-04-05T17:57:56.118-04:00If you can't handle the fact that you forgot t...If you can't handle the fact that you forgot there were civil regulations as well as criminal, I don't care.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07573847127040276949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-44346368343049907692012-04-05T17:55:58.821-04:002012-04-05T17:55:58.821-04:00"realize I am right about the force so want t..."realize I am right about the force so want to move on to other libertarian beliefs"<br />Another obvious lie. Your credibility here has reached, if possible, a new low.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07573847127040276949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-13308730153991409682012-04-05T17:52:44.669-04:002012-04-05T17:52:44.669-04:00Roy,
Let's stick to the original point you ma...Roy,<br /><br />Let's stick to the original point you made. Let's assume force sake of argument it's ok to use force interchangably with threat of violence and/ or imprisonment and I am not the slick trickster you say I am.<br /><br />How is government regulation imposed?<br /><br />You say no force, it's only fines, just hurts your credit.<br /><br />I say no, those fines are imposed by force.<br /><br /><br />Who is right?<br /><br />What happens if the government fines you for breaking a regulation and you refuse to pay the fine?<br /><br />They just put a mark on your credit and all is good? No force?<br /><br />Is that true?Jim Fisherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16928807367473160898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-25676847567341801352012-04-05T17:51:07.284-04:002012-04-05T17:51:07.284-04:00I'm not trying to tell you anything, Governme...I'm not trying to tell you anything, Government regulation in a properly operated democracy (with no Ron Pauls in charge that is) s a cooperative endeavor. There are no markets that operate successfully and never have been without all parties trusting that the others will cooperate in making the markets work.<br />But it's useless to argue with those that can't grasp that simplest of an abstract concept.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07573847127040276949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-62692744033391131642012-04-05T17:43:14.759-04:002012-04-05T17:43:14.759-04:00I think I get it. Your moving from the "gover...I think I get it. Your moving from the "government can only have regulation with backing of force" debate and arguing with a straw man about safety nets, because you know I am a libertarian and realize I am right about the force so want to move on to other libertarian beliefsJim Fisherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16928807367473160898noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-88599365271149431402012-04-05T17:43:03.450-04:002012-04-05T17:43:03.450-04:00"Somehow I let you slip in the term "civ..."Somehow I let you slip in the term "civil" court and took the bait." Another lie. No such trickery was involved. You're the trickster. It's the only way you zealots can defeat honest logic. Switching the original premises to suit your persuasive purposes is your best tactic. Fallacious practice, nevertheless.<br />Nobody's biting.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07573847127040276949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15005476.post-21459564195748551872012-04-05T17:38:36.401-04:002012-04-05T17:38:36.401-04:00What the heck are you talking about?
I am an advo...What the heck are you talking about?<br /><br />I am an advocate for the free market in place of government <br /><br />You are mixing them up<br /><br />I say all government regulation is imposed by force.<br /><br />You say no most is posed by fines<br /><br />I am saying those fines are imposed by force<br /><br />Markets are 100 voluntary and use no force<br />Government only imposes by force, even it's fines.<br /><br />I don't know what the heck your saying with your homeless guy, does he owe to the market? Government? <br /><br />You were trying to tell me the government can Impose its regulation without force and refused to think it throughJim Fisherhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16928807367473160898noreply@blogger.com