Would You Rather Win $100 Mill But.....

[Born2BKing]

Give me $10 million, I'm good

That's some spiteful shyt. Who hurt you?

 

[Trot LaRoc]

I'm not a petty lilbytch so 20 milly for me

 

[Zero]

So you would rather have 10 million instead of 20 million?

If I don't have to give anything up for it, hell yeah

An 80 million dollar loss is not good under any circumstance.

 

[Tasha And]

If I don't have to give anything up for it, hell yeah

An 80 million dollar loss is not good under any circumstance.

Does this opinion scale lol?

Like what if the scenario was

You get 10 billion but you have to give away 8 billion, but you keep 2 billion

Or you get 10 million and get to keep it all.

You still picking the 10 million because it's a better business decision than "losing" 8 billion?

 

[UpAndComing]

That's some spiteful shyt. Who hurt you?

I'm spiteful cause I don't want to give someone else $80 mill

 

[KidJSoul]

This is actually a social/psychological exercise low key

It shows that many people would rather have less or even suffer, as long as the person they hate has it worse than them.

 

[Born2BKing]

I'm spiteful cause I don't want to give someone else $80 mill

You ain't, if it isnt your decision.

 

[Formerly known as...]

I'm taking the 10.

I just can't give an ex 80 no matter what!

 

[Primetime21]

Oh so it's the act of giving away money that bothers you?

So would you rather have 10 million given to you instead of having 1 billion, but you have to give up 500 million?

Regarding your first question, for me 10 million dollars is life changing money. I think people in this thread got stuck on who the 80 million dollars was going to just so they could build a narrative like who hurt you, you're spiteful, etc. and I just dont see it that way. If it was a 100 million dollar reparations check but 80 million had to go to a white or asian family and you keep 20, or you just get a 10 million check that's yours I'm still taking the second option. Most people wouldnt be substantially happier with 5 million than with 2, or with 10 million than with 5. So for me, I'm not getting ganked out of 80 million just so I can say I'm 10 million dollars richer when the reality is I would be happy and able to do all the things I want to do with 10 million.

 

[Zero]

Does this opinion scale lol?

Like what if the scenario was

I've wasted enough time on these idiot games yall are playing. I'm not taking a loss if I don't have to. Period.

Yall are ok with losing, it is what it is.

 

[Daniel.]

Oh so it's the act of giving away money that bothers you?

So would you rather have 10 million given to you instead of having 1 billion, but you have to give up 500 million?

I can't have that bytch living life off MY 500 milly

 

[Tasha And]

This is actually a social/psychological exercise low key

It shows that many people would rather have less or even suffer, as long as the person they hate has it worse than them.

This is a phenomenon that has been observed in social experiments.

Henri Tajfel took a group of random people, arbitrarily assigned them to different groups, group "underestimator" and group "overestimator", and separated them in different rooms. And he presented different allocation scenarios to the groups and found that the in group always wanted the out group to get less stuff.

In one of the scenarios, the overestimators were given a scenario where (i'm spitballing the numbers here, but it was something like)

Everyone can have $10

or

The overestimators get $6

and the underestimators get $1

And the overestimators chose to take less money in order to make sure the underestimators lost, rather than everyone getting more money.

 

[Yessir_Araphat]

fukk that shyt. Don’t think I’d be able to enjoy the money knowing I gave someone, in my opinion, undeserving, that much. Although there are some girls that things were more casual than an actual relationship, that I wouldn’t hesitate to give em that 80 milly

 

[JoseLuisGotcha]

I’m a Taurus give me the 10

 

[Daniel.]

This is a phenomenon that has been observed in social experiments.

Henri Tajfel took a group of random people, arbitrarily assigned them to different groups, group "underestimator" and group "overestimator", and separated them in different rooms. And he presented different allocation scenarios to the groups and found that the in group always wanted the out group to get less stuff.

In one of the scenarios, the overestimators were given a scenario where (i'm spitballing the numbers here, but it was something like)

Everyone can have $10

or

The overestimators get $6

and the underestimators get $1

And the overestimators chose to take less money in order to make sure the underestimators lost, rather than everyone getting more money.

The prospect of this is just wild to me but it spills out into every day life all the time.

It's how stores ran out of fukking toilet paper at the start of the pandemic.

Self preservation is a hell of thing.