Sexual Economics

[Infinity]

FVCK IT

 

[Cheiradawg]

Originally posted by Infinity
Conclusion

In the end, we can take each of these three points and develop three downward sloping graphs with the X axis representing cost and the Y axis representing benefit (remember, this isn't freaking practical advice, this is theory so you don't actually have to do this or criticize me for being so geeky!). [/B]

Flawed!

Lets take a look at these graphs. As the "costs" get larger you state that the benefit one recieves decrease. So this is like saying that banging chicks with high "costs" offers little benefit. Higher costs would mean that they are hot most of the time. So you are saying that banging hot chicks is of less benefit than banging ugly girls.

 

[Infinity]

Re: Re: Sexual Economics

Originally posted by Cheiradawg
Flawed!

Lets take a look at these graphs. As the "costs" get larger you state that the benefit one recieves decrease. So this is like saying that banging chicks with high "costs" offers little benefit. Higher costs would mean that they are hot most of the time. So you are saying that banging hot chicks is of less benefit than banging ugly girls.

Well, ya got me there, bud! Maybe instead of benefits I was thinking likelihood of having sex or something? I got tired writing that....I dunno.

 

[uniassign]

You did a good job in merging two totally unrelated field. I wasn't going to reply to this. I figured that you are a smart guy, and has good potential to get the chick/(s) you desire, that's why I am going to give you some TOUGH LOVE.

Maybe if I lower that cost I'll end my virginity, too!

Maybe if you spent the time it took for you to type that up and spent it actually talking to chicks, you might get closer to your goal.

Seriously, why spend all that time on THEORISING? Wait until you can pull the hottest chick in the place, THEN worry about theorising.

When you have no experience, your theory does not mean JACK! Divert your intelligence into putting the tactics into action. Put your effort into practising.

 

[Infinity]

Originally posted by uniassign
You did a good job in merging two totally unrelated field. I wasn't going to reply to this. I figured that you are a smart guy, and has good potential to get the chick/(s) you desire, that's why I am going to give you some TOUGH LOVE.

Maybe if I lower that cost I'll end my virginity, too!

Maybe if you spent the time it took for you to type that up and spent it actually talking to chicks, you might get closer to your goal.

Seriously, why spend all that time on THEORISING? Wait until you can pull the hottest chick in the place, THEN worry about theorising.

When you have no experience, your theory does not mean JACK! Divert your intelligence into putting the tactics into action. Put your effort into practising.

Dude, I was bored. But, you're right, when I see myself make a theory like this, it might be time to take a break from this site.

 

[HuuBinh]

Infinity, I think you've made a great attempt in explaining economically why people prefer masturbasion. One point I'd like you to realize is that, eventhough I know what your trying to say that there's a negative relationship between cost and benefit, it seems very logical that as the cost (such as sex) goes up, the benefit of it must go down, thus a downward sloping curve. But, have you thought about that the relationship between cost and benefit could actually be positive?

For example, lets say you have two options when choosing to buy a car. You can either spend $40K on a brand new BMW, or a $20K on a Chevy. It is plausible for me to make the assumption that one would prefer a BMW over a Chevy. Although the decision to buy which car depends on your budget constraint and your indiference curve.

Eventhough the cost of the Chevy is cheaper, it also entails lower benefit psychologically compared to a BMW. For that reason, the graph that demonstrates an increasing behavior with a diminishing slope as cost increases is much better to use when explaining your framework, such as the function f(x)=ln(x), or a concave function f(x)= a +bx - cx^2.

It would be more reasonable to state that as the cost (such as sex) increases, the benefit of it also increases at a decreasing rate than to say that as cost increases benefit decreases.

 

[Player_Supreme]

"Squirrels and I were discussing the reasons why someone would masturbate rather ,than have sex and eventually we agreed that there are three primary reasons why masturbation occurs:

- Lack of Money
- Too much work to get sex
- Only sex available is ego-damaging"

-------------------------------------------------

Considering your source:

Your talking to Squirrels. I say no more and rest my case!

Wasn't he recently posting on wondering why a man needs a woman or some gay assed shyt?

This whole theory is cracked pot..or some kinda pot induced gibberish...sorry.

------------------------------------------------

How about having no game to be able to even get a decent women on your list also. And what kid of sex is ego damaging? I've never heard of this coming from a man. Yeah women but not men...strange and confusing times... Where's Puerto Rican Lover at??

Next time your composing new theories:

"Take no advice from the person who isn’t doing the things you want to do or living the life you want to live.

If you want to learn martial arts you go to a school where you learn from a black belt. You know he is a black belt because you can see his ranking (proof) you will also see other signs of his certification such as trophies, awards…but basically you will see visable signs of proof that he is capable of teaching you.

You need to talk to men who get women and start doing the things that they do and start behaving like a man who gets women."

---The dating black book

 

[squirrels]

Originally posted by Player_Supreme
Considering your source:

Your talking to Squirrels. I say no more and rest my case!

Wasn't he recently posting on wondering why a man needs a woman or some gay assed shyt?

This whole theory is cracked pot..or some kinda pot induced gibberish...sorry.

Since Infinity continues to refuse to take action, we often end up in these mental masturbation contests, in which I continually reassure him that the philosophy behind it doesn't matter and he needs to get out in the field and stop worrying about "hows" and "whys".

They go something like this:

"Do you think this girl..." doesn't matter, go talk to her.
"I have this hangup with..." doesn't matter, go talk to her.
"Isn't sex analogous to..." doesn't matter, go talk to her.
"I wonder why I always feel..." doesn't matter, go talk to her.

In all truth, I agree with YOU here. Infinity is hanging on too tight, trying to explain everything, trying to control everything, trying to predict everything so he knows just what to do, with 0 chance of failure. I've been telling him to just GO FAIL. As if it's a big fykking deal to strike out with a woman.

 

[Don Chico]

Re: Re: Re: Sexual Economics

Originally posted by Infinity
Well, ya got me there, bud! Maybe instead of benefits I was thinking likelihood of having sex or something? I got tired writing that....I dunno.

Wouldn't the term be marginal benefit?

 

[b's nuts]

This is the worst post i have ever read. sh*t. damn. fvck. what a waste of time. the only math involved in why you aren't getting laid is cuz your sack doesn't add up to two balls. damn, your fvcking wierd for even thinking that sh*t up. get a life.

 

[Cheiradawg]

It's not calculs:


U+ME=US

du nanananannan- naaa

 

[CyranoDeBergerac]

Actually the only fallacy that's been pointed out yet is a matter of opportunity cost and pecieved value. I have this ammount of time and effort; this is how much I value making the mootch with her; this is what it would 'cost' to do so; this is how much I want to do everything else; this is the cost of everything else; which would I judge a better use of resources?

I was actually thinking about doing a post like this a while ago combining my love of sex and economic theory. You also mention forms of conspicuous consumption (and its effect on percieved value), and the law of diminishing returns.

Seriously though. Women aren't interested in your intellectual capacity and everything that comes with it. They're interested in your d1ck and everything that comes with it. As much as I'm sure you enjoy theory, it probably won't feel as good around your shaft as a woman. That's the difference between acting within your mind and acting within the tangible world.

The only way to do that is to get out there and do it. You must risk continual failure to gaurantee success. Remember, theory is NOTHING without practice.

-CyranoDeBergerac

 

[DankNuggs]

I spent my HS AP econ class with two other pretty gifted students coming up with these kind of analyses, everything from efficiency frontiers, to phillips curves, you have to love econ because its logic is pretty much the basis for all rational thought.

I then became a finance major in college. You talk about concepts such as 'real option valuation' it goes beyond financial vehicles, you can determine the 'value' of say having the opportunity to buy a condo, talk to a girl, cross the street. It gets into indifference curves, i.e. an analysis of personal risk aversion, how much benefit you would need to receive in order to risk at each level of personal value. Technically, you could turn every conscious action into a financial/economic real option. Your life would be utterly efficient along your personal values.

You need to lower your risk aversion frontier the earlier you are, because as you age, it will steepen naturally due to the fact that your opportunity cost (other available women/potential situations) will diminish. The only way to do this is to mentally minimize the potential 'losses' (i.e. rejection, ego reduction, need for relationships).

Its basically the DJ bible in graphical form...We verbally talk about these concepts, but they are economically viable due to supply and demand, and oppotunity costs analysis.