ARNOLD KLING
August 14, 2011
The Top Political Contributors
August 11, 2011
Gender and the New Commanding Heights
August 11, 2011
Jamie Galbraith Makes an Assumption
August 11, 2011
Macroeconometrics: The Science of Hubris
August 10, 2011
Real and Nominal Bond Yields
BRYAN CAPLAN
August 14, 2011
The Effect of Thumb Sucking on Income
August 12, 2011
The Voice of Cold, Hard Truth to All Would-Be Educators
August 12, 2011
Ability, Morality, and Prosperity: A Paper and a Report
August 11, 2011
The Theory of Time and Frittering
August 10, 2011
Male Variance and the Remnants of the Gender Gap
DAVID HENDERSON
August 9, 2011
Hayek in "Unbroken", Part Two
August 8, 2011
Hayek in "Unbroken"
August 5, 2011
James Bovard on the Peace Corps
August 4, 2011
Summers Way Off on FDR and 1941
August 3, 2011
The "Amazon" Tax
SHARE
Arnold keeps beating the mathematical expectation drum, even though you're betting even money on a positive or negative. I don't get it.
Wait a sec... Arnold says something to the effect of:
Put $100 down and roll a d10. On a 1, loose all your money. On a 2 through 10, gain $5.
I wouldn't take that bet. Am I missing something here?
Eh, never mind, hadn't had my coffee yet...
Even though I agree with your position in general (that the bailout is much likely more likely to lose money than gain), I'm on the fence about taking your bet as I think the opportunities for the CBO to declare a gain despite there being a significant loss in real terms that account for all costs are very wide.
If arnold thinks most of the losses happen in a 10% extreme scenario, I don't understand why he wouldn't take your bet.