The Chrysler Minivan Fan Club Forums banner

The Paradox of Choice: Why More is Less

5K views 14 replies 6 participants last post by  Hokiefyd 
#1 ·
Too many vehicles, with too many options, in a world of too much of everything for sale.. Does this consumer dream correlate with our "happiness"? If you doubt it, you're not alone...

Here's a new article in the NYT A Nation of Second Guesses from the author of The Paradox of Choice: Why More Is Less

(Incidentally, this article doesn't even mention the effect of "too many choices" has on highlighting and exacerbating the "earnings gap" - and the growing rift in perceived fairness and equality of our "corporcracy"...)

-Jim
 
#2 ·
While I agree with the notion of the article, especially in certain circumstances, I wholeheartedly disagree with it in the context in which it's written...that is using that notion to justify the government managing my "retirement" money. With the priviledge of choice comes responsibility, and this can really be applied to ANY situation. We have the choice of gas-guzzling SUVs, and many of us make that choice. We have the choice of going nose-down into debt, and many of us make THAT choice. We have the choice to invest in our own futures and retirements, and many of us blow that choice. The way my cynical mind sees it, those of us who make good choices end up being accountable for everyone else in the end anyway (through social security and welfare programs), and it really doesn't matter WHEN the government takes my money -- they're going to get it one way or another. :(
 
#4 · (Edited)
I actually come at it from the opposite direction. Neither choice will make any appeciable difference. So rather than squander time and effort trying to make the choice, I simply ignore that it's even there, and focus my attention on things that matter to me, like my family/church/community...and how clean my cars are. :)

Like I said, I do agree with the article. Given too many choices, and assuming that one cares deeply about them all, one could run oneself into depression or panic, obsessing over which choice is the right one; I don't contest that. I do think that's a key point though. We don't all care deeply about the same things, nor have the same viewpoints. Some folks are environmental nuts, while others don't care one way or the other. Some folks obsess over which is the best washer or dryer, and others will go to Sears and pick the first one they see and use it for 15 years. I think the notion that choice CAN be bad is true, as long as they acknowledge that many people are really indifferent to the plethora of choice out there.

I'm of the mindset, based on experience and other beliefs, that I can spend my time in better ways than obsessing over a decision that can even last as long as my lifetime, as short as that actually is. There's only ONE choice that really matters to me, and I've made that long ago...
 
#5 ·
Let me follow up... I guess what I'm saying is that the preponderance of choice has driven me not to obsession, but to indifference. It's probably still arguable that that's "a bad thing". I still appreciate that the choice is there, because it allows me to make that choice IF I DESIRE. The social security thing is a good example (I think). The proposal was to allow people to pull their money out and invest it themselves, IF THEY SO CHOOSE. If they're indifferent to it all, the government could still (mis)manage it for them.

In order for that article to be complete, I think they need to address the opposite phenonmenon: me. I clearly see how too many choices could drive some folks into madness and insanity. But if choice drives one to indifference...is that a negative thing?
 
#6 ·
Why is it that if you choose an SUV to drive you are vilified everywhere (e.g. the press, Al Gore, the tree huggers and anyone with a "cause"). BUT, if you choose to go "nose down into debt" you are treated as royalty, with sympathy and bail outs for all so inclined to descend? NEVER is there any concern for the debts erased by "bankruptcy" courts while the "poor" are never asked to pay any taxes.
I manage money for a living, and I'm pretty sure a blind monkey with a dartboard could choose better retirement investments than the Government.
Leave me and my family alone to choose what is important to us (thank you Jason) and we will naturally limit our own choices to the essential few : God, family and rock 'n roll.
Oh, ..... and a white Town and Country Ltd. Van. :headbange
 
#9 · (Edited)
blind monkey making better investments than the Government?

Why is it that if you choose an SUV to drive you are vilified everywhere (e.g. the press, Al Gore, the tree huggers and anyone with a "cause"). BUT, if you choose to go "nose down into debt" you are treated as royalty, with sympathy and bail outs for all so inclined to descend? NEVER is there any concern for the debts erased by "bankruptcy" courts while the "poor" are never asked to pay any taxes.
I manage money for a living, and I'm pretty sure a blind monkey with a dartboard could choose better retirement investments than the Government.
Leave me and my family alone to choose what is important to us (thank you Jason) and we will naturally limit our own choices to the essential few : God, family and rock 'n roll.
Oh, ..... and a white Town and Country Ltd. Van. :headbange
And a blind monkey would have been smarter than the current administration that started an immoral WAR based on lies and deceit when the father of the president was smart enough to leave Iraq alone within its own borders. The BIGGEST waste of taxpayer dollars has and is being spent on the War in Iraq, while virtually ignoring the real threat that was in Afghanistan.:help_wsig

Sadly, many politicians have forgotten the quagmire of Vietnam which most of the current administration evaded themselves.

Fortunately, Chrysler offers us a much better choice for a family vehicle than was offered back in the early 60's when our politicians got the USA involved in Vietnam.
 
#7 ·
Well, I perceived that article as promoting a reduction in choice, at least in some arenas. My perception may be wrong, but that's how I read it. My disagreement with that is this: if x% of the population cannot handle choice (for whatever reason), and x% can, and x% don't care one way or the other, is the solution to all of that to eliminate choice?

I have a co-worker whose hobby is day-trading on the stock market. He's always looking at his stocks, seeing which are up and which are down, etc. He enjoys it. Great. I know for a fact that some people almost go insane with the stock market -- meaning they'll do just as this article prescribes -- they'll obsess over it, get emotionally and physically sick over the choice they made...regrets, heartaches, etc. I'm kind of on the other end...I have some stuff in some mutual funds and honestly, if I check their performance once every quarter, I feel like I'm married to them.

So given this scenario -- that some people can handle it, that some people can't, and that some people will be relatively indifferent, I question what I perceived to be the intent of the article. Why should those who relish the choice, and appreciate the choice, be penalized because of those who can't handle it? Maybe I simply mis-read the article.
 
#8 ·
Perhaps it wasn't mis-read. I think it was mis-written.
The thing was confusing on purpose. IF you are too, confused, you tend to throw up your hands and walk away from a problem. Which the writer wants us to do on this issue. Then, his buddies in the Democratic Peoples Party can step in to protect us from ourselves and take over and manage our lives for us. It may take a Village... but these folks always want to be the "benevolent" dictators making the choices for the Village.
Real choice is a good thing. If someone is confused, hire an expert to help rather than settle for a faceless bureaucrat making decisions for you. Get two opinions from two experts if you are really confused, but giving it all up to the Government is rarely in someone's best interest. (That's why we laugh when you hear someone say "I'm from the government, and I'm here to help.")

And, yes, I can over-obsess on chocolate choices. But I've decided dark chocolate is at least better for my heart than regular, so I go for the dark stuff. A bit o'logic goes a long way sometimes..... I get to eat chocolate, and if anyone asks, "It's for my health". :)
 
#10 ·
Then, his buddies in the Democratic Peoples Party can step in to protect us from ourselves and take over and manage our lives for us. It may take a Village... but these folks always want to be the "benevolent" dictators making the choices for the Village.
Real choice is a good thing. If someone is confused, hire an expert to help rather than settle for a faceless bureaucrat making decisions for you.
I really do agree with all of that. Speaking of government in general, and not just about one political party, the more of your money they have, the more control they have, and they know it. They more they can make you think you need them, the more control they have, and they know it.

I'm always for empowering the PEOPLE to do as they wish. We should all be big boys and girls. If we're not responsible enough to make our own decisions, there are plenty of countries out there where we can go to have our lives run for us. :cry:
 
#11 ·
The Democratic Peoples Party was a reference to the general name assumed by socialist parties around the world. It is unfortunate that our own Democrat Party is choosing to evolve towards that, too. Yeah, I was a Democrat Public Housing Commissioner. Later, City Council and Mayor candidate under the Democrat banner. 34 votes made the difference in my losing the election..... now that is real choice at work. ( Oh, .... also, in addition to regular duties, I joined an all volunteer group for search and rescue of downed pilots throughout SEA in '68 and 69...1st Mob "First In, Last Out" :headbange )

Without doubt, and I personally know this from more directions than some would imagine, the Vietnam war was "lost" BY the politicians..... not the military. General Vo Nguyen Giap sent his emissary to Paris with the instructions to surrender after Tet. It was when he heard Walter Cronkite had said we couldn't win the war, on our national television, that he withdrew the guy and fought on.

So, yes, we have forgotten how messes are created. The Viet Nam war was started in the 1940's by the French and they were later helped by Eisenhower. Once elected, JFK was afraid to be seen as "weak" in the eyes of the world, so he started the first big adviser build-ups. LBJ simply felt the same way but really escalated things and removed choice from the commanders on the ground and assumed all control, himself. It took Nixon to end it by the tried and true method of killing the enemy wherever they were.

If we choose Hillary, she will face the same questions, and will not withdraw from Iraq. Just like Jack.
Choosing her would, however, remove doubt about Nationalist Health Care choices, retirement choices, and child re-education choices ... oops, I meant child care.
Those initiatives will be closely followed by "The Peoples Car". High gas mileage cracker boxes with low survivability. (But, that won't matter.... we'll have free health care to sooth those accident injuries) And it will come in any color you choose.... as long as it's black.

To those that want to revise world history about WWII and the atomic bombing of Japan, there is only a two word response necessary: Pearl Harbor.
To those that want to revise current (read "election cycle") history, only two words are needed: Twin Towers.

By the way, when they come for my T&C, they will have to pry my cold dead fingers off the steering wheel. :ninja:
 
#12 ·
It is HIGHLY Offensive for the Publican Party to say Democrat Party...

The Democratic Peoples Party was a reference to the general name assumed by socialist parties around the world. It is unfortunate that our own Democrat Party is choosing to evolve towards that, too.
Even though Rush Limbaugh and other extremely right wing fringe think it is cute. As Harry Truman said when Republicans started calling the Democratic Party the Democrat Party "We will trade our "ic" for their "Re" and call it the Publican Party. Remember, the Publicans were the despised tax collectors in Biblical times who collected more than necessary by extortion". (or words to that effect)
( Oh, .... also, in addition to regular duties, I joined an all volunteer group for search and rescue of downed pilots throughout SEA in '68 and 69...1st Mob "First In, Last Out" :headbange )
We have something in common in addition to liking Chrysler minivans...I was USA Army in Vietnam 65-66 and 69-70 which explains my distaste for politicians who start wars to have other people's children killed.

[qipte] Without doubt, and I personally know this from more directions than some would imagine, the Vietnam war was "lost" BY the politicians..... not the military. [/quote] We agree 100 %.

.... It took Nixon to end it by the tried and true method of killing the enemy wherever they were.
NOT quite the whole story. Nixon and the spineless politicians "CUT AND RUN" from Vietnam a few years after the USA invaded Cambodia.

If we choose Hillary, she will face the same questions, and will not withdraw from Iraq. Just like Jack.
Hillary is NOT my first choice but she will be smarter than George W. who listened to his draft dodging trio instead of Sec of State Colin Powell (GEN, Ret) and Bush fired Chief of Staff Eric Shinseki who told him it would take AT LEAST double the troops this administration used to invade Iraq.

To those that want to revise world history about WWII and the atomic bombing of Japan, there is only a two word response necessary: Pearl Harbor....To those that want to revise current (read "election cycle") history, only two words are needed: Twin Towers.
WOW, How could history be any more distorted than to connect the Twin Towers with the immoral invasion of Iraq?

By the way, when they come for my T&C, they will have to pry my cold dead fingers off the steering wheel. :ninja:
Again, we agree but you are smarter than I was. I willingly got an inferior minivan after owning a T&C and before it a GC. :thumb:
 
#13 ·
Gentlemen, I am sure there are many political discussion forums for this kind of discussion. In my experience these kinds of postings do not get more friendly with time.

Can we get back to talking about spark plugs and sway bar bushings?
 
#15 ·
Gentlemen, I am sure there are many political discussion forums for this kind of discussion. In my experience these kinds of postings do not get more friendly with time.
I think that is sage advice. We all obviously have differing opinions on a variety of topics. I think we can all be thankful for what IAFarmer stated -- that we have the freedom and privilege of using such a resource to better ourselves and our material toys (our vehicles) while we're here on this planet.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top