Are People Willing to Pay to Reduce Others' Incomes?.

This paper studies utility interdependence in the laboratory. We design an experiment where subjects can reduce ("burn") other subjects' money. Those who burn the money of others have to give up some of their own cash. Despite this cost, and contrary to the assumptions of economics textbooks, the majority of our subjects choose to destroy at least part of others' money holdings. We vary experimentally the amount that subjects have to pay to reduce other people's cash. The implied price elasticity of burning is calculated; it is mostly less than unity. There is a strong correlation between wealth, or rank, and the amounts by which subjects are burnt.INCOME ; MONEY ; PRICES

Envy and Agricultural Innovation: An Experimental Case Study from Ethiopia

The underlying motivations for envy or related social preferences and their impact on agricultural innovations are examined by combining data from money burning experimental game and household survey from Ethiopia. In the first stage of the money burning experimental game, income inequality is induced by providing different endowments and playing a lottery. In the second, people are allowed to decrease (‘burn’) other players’ money at their own expense. Conditional on individual behaviour, experimentally measured envious preferences from others have a negative effect on real life agricultural innovation.envy, social preferences, money burning games, agricultural innovations, Ethiopia

Are people willing to pay to reduce others' incomes?

This paper studies utility interdependence in the laboratory. We design an experiment where subjects can reduce ("burn") other subjects' money. Those who burn the money of others have to give up some of their own cash. Despite this cost, and contrary to the assumptions of economics textbooks, the majority of our subjects choose to destroy at least part of others' money holdings. We vary experimentally the amount that subjects have to pay to reduce other people's cash. The implied price elasticity of burning is calculated; it is mostly less than unity. There is a strong correlation between wealth, or rank, and the amounts by which subjects are burnt. In making their decisions, many burners, especially disadvantaged ones, seem to care about whether another person ‘deserves’ the money he has. Desert is not simply a matter of relative payoff

Is increasing inequality harmful? Experimental evidence

Increasing inequality is commonly associated with social unrest and conflict between social classes. This paper reports the results of a laboratory experiment to study the implications of rising inequality on the tendency to burn others' income. The experiment considers an environment where higher earnings are typically associated with higher effort and varies how fair and transparent this relationship is. The findings indicate that increasing inequality does not per se lead to more money burning. Rather, it depends on whether the increase in inequality can be unequivocally attributed to exerted effort. If subjects can tweak the income-generating process in their favor, money burning is substantially higher. Low-income subjects are more likely to burn others' income and most of the money burning is aimed at subjects with higher incomes

Proof-of-Burn

Proof-of-burn has been used as a mechanism to destroy cryptocurrency in a verifiable manner. Despite its well known use, the mechanism has not been previously formally studied as a primitive. In this paper, we put forth the first cryptographic definition of what a proof-of-burn protocol is. It consists of two functions: First, a function which generates a cryptocurrency address. When a user sends money to this address, the money is irrevocably destroyed. Second, a verification function which checks that an address is really unspendable. We propose the following properties for burn protocols. Unspendability, which mandates that an address which verifies correctly as a burn address cannot be used for spending; binding, which allows associating metadata with a particular burn; and uncensorability, which mandates that a burn address is indistinguishable from a regular cryptocurrency address. Our definition captures all previously known proof-of-burn protocols. Next, we design a novel construction for burning which is simple and flexible, making it compatible with all existing popular cryptocurrencies. We prove our scheme is secure in the Random Oracle model. We explore the application of destroying value in a legacy cryptocurrency to bootstrap a new one. The user burns coins in the source blockchain and subsequently creates a proof-of-burn, a short string proving that the burn took place, which she then submits to the destination blockchain to be rewarded with a corresponding amount. The user can use a standard wallet to conduct the burn without requiring specialized software, making our scheme user friendly. We propose burn verification mechanisms with different security guarantees, noting that the target blockchain miners do not necessarily need to monitor the source blockchain. Finally, we implement the verification of Bitcoin burns as an Ethereum smart contract and experimentally measure that the gas costs needed for verification are as low as standard Bitcoin transaction fees, illustrating that our scheme is practical

An Optimal Signaling Equilibrium

This paper analyses the optimal combination of costly and costless messages that a Sender uses in a signaling game if he is able to choose among all equilibrium communication strategies. We provide a complete characterization of the equilibrium that maximizes the Sender's ex ante expected utility in case of uniformly distributed types and quadratic loss functions. First, the Sender often wants to avoid money burning by using the most informative cheap talk communication strategy. Second, if he does burn money, he avoids separation and only re-arranges the existing intervals of the most informative cheap talk equilibrium, possibly adding one extra interval. Money burning takes place in the second interval only

Otter Realm, April 19, 2000, Vol. 5 No. 14

Presidential Re-Election or Not? -- Otter Stream -- Dancing on the Rim of the Universe on FT Ord with Phil Esparza -- World of Experience Comes to the World Theater -- First Annual Spring World Arts Festival -- Big Sur 1/2 Marathon Success! -- Otter Hockey -- Science Center Gains Ground! -- Got roomie? -- Twilight on Campus -- Your Money Your Choice -- Burn Baby Burn -- Students Learn Life Skills Rock\u27n at Sea aboard the USS Golden Bear -- Breakwater by Day or Night -- The Greenhouse Effect -- The Word -- Rent Increase -- Fall 2000 Registration -- Earthweek 2000 at CSUMB -- Preparing Leaders for a Collaborative Multicultural Society -- Horoscopeshttps://digitalcommons.csumb.edu/otterrealm/1057/thumbnail.jp

Let them burn money: making elections more informative

A standard election in which each voter chooses a single alternative permits voters little scope to express the intensity of their preferences. Allowing more complex statements of preferences may not alleviate the problem if voters behave strategically, as only certain statements are credible. I consider the implications of allowing voters to burn money as part of the voting procedure. In an environment with two alternatives and voters with interdependent values, I find necessary and sufficient conditions for all choice functions that are minimally responsive to voter preferences to be implementable with money burning. Furthermore, I show that any choice rule that treats exante identical voters symmetrically can be implemented with an arbitrarily small amount of money burnt per voter as the set of voters is replicated. Thus, for a large electorate, the informational gains of money burning can be reaped at virtually no social cost

Pinching pennies or money to burn? The role of grit in financial behaviors

We explore whether gritty individuals are better savers by virtue of their wealth or due to diligent choices that benefit their long-term economic health. We test these competing hypotheses by examining the ways in which grit influences how LMI tax filers report spending or saving their tax refund in the months following tax filing. We leverage a novel dataset combining longitudinal household financial survey data with administrative tax data for a sample of 6,904 low- and moderate-income tax filers. After balancing individuals on grit with propensity score weighting and machine learning, we find that grit was associated with better financial behaviors, even among individuals with lower incomes. Furthermore, the influence of grit on savings behaviors held in the presence of key life stressors that low-income individuals often face. Furthermore, we find that gritty individuals prioritized spending on education over gifts, resembling the determination and passion to pursue their long-term goals