Author of quotes: Jenny Anderson

Game theory was very clearly demonstrates one simple truth: in relationships it is impossible to get everything, so focus should be on everything that is possible in the circumstances.

Game theory is aimed at one thing - to help to behave in a situation, when to get what you want in full is impossible. In this case, you need to develop a strategy that will allow you to achieve the best possible results - while taking into account the likely actions of your partners. Note those magic words: the best possible results. That is to expect that you will be able to "get what I want" or "prove his innocence", it is not necessary - although, of course, most of us are trying to do precisely that.

And in game theory, and marriage always seems more enticing non-cooperative strategy; and game theory, and marriage to universal prosperity leads, as a rule, cooperative strategy.

Those who are not afraid of innovations to thrive, and those who cling to the old, gradually fade.

The most important tool of self-restraint: marriage! If you haven't noticed, marriage has been created in order to oblige you to comply with their obligations.

"Hyperbolic discounting". <...> it basically means the following: we appreciate the benefits that can be achieved in the future, much less than those that can get in the present. Therefore, it is very difficult to resist the temptation to enjoy what is offered to us right now, even if we are aware of the irrationality of such an act.

If Smith proved that States can get rich by saving, then ray found that States can save money only on the condition that they are residents able to do something to limit myself. And rightly so - everyone who though time in life tried to become richer, happier, or slimmer, knows that the secret of success in restraint.

"Intertemporal choice" is the term that economists represent the decisions we make in the present, but it is very important for the future.

The more Dave talked, everything is fine, but behaved as if everything is normal, the more options an explanation of his tricks - one other is worse - came up with Kate. And who would in its place was not to cheat yourself? The simplest solution to all, except, of course, the Dave - to Dave directly and openly expressed.

Not owning the full information, we cannot make an informed decision. And when we can't make an informed decision, we either accept unreasonable decision (which can lead to big trouble, like buying the old ruins or a sharp drop of self-esteem), or exit the game and risk losing a really good guy - or refuse to do deals.

Output: accept. Economists say that in a market economy, people inevitably have to choose between justice or what is fair, and performance - that is, the optimum allocation of resources. Not everyone can get rich, even though it is unfair. Some people are destined to build your business, and others - a lifetime plugging away in the handling Department correspondence. Some people achieve work dreams, while others sit at home and raise children.

Over the years, as a rule, a balance. But if you're going to demand justice here and now, there is a danger never to achieve harmony - and will all the way to squabble about who owes what to whom.

At the same time, any couple will agree to divide everything in black and white or to reduce any conflict to a choice between "leave" or "stay" isn't the right strategy.

Economists would answer that cling to their past investments (or what is called "sunk costs"), instead of thinking about the future - a completely pointless exercise.