Fairness from the gambling nature of the difficulty of different
Xue Zhaofeng
happiness does not make the comparison between people. Just started reading the economy the students often have to practice with the map line to express the common economic concepts, such as \ 说什么也得 a cigarette, \ These exercises, there is a basic agreement, that happiness can only be from a personal point of view, not to make the comparison between people, because it can not.
However, the economics to personal \ By saying it is \ This look at the issue in two, many would have seemed confusing to explain human behavior,
nike air force one, such as \
Some people like to take risks, even if the chance to win the weak, but as long to win again, will be able to ecstatic, economists call them \ and then a small, but as long as input once, you ' d rather die, they are \
I'm in Las Vegas ############s, saw a big fellow,
air force one low, he sat in the middle of three slot machines, his hands open about attack, mechanically fed to the three slot machine tokens. Although the feed into the more than spit it out, but he is still nothing had happened, busy, full of \ Barring unforeseen circumstances, he is a typical \
familiar Balzac (H. de Balzac) described by the \ It was a \ Curbing the money, just like to be his life. The problem is, I never can understand Grandet, learn more economics to understand him, did not despise or ridicule of the mean. Why? Because that is his happiness lies.
most people, it is free in between these two extremes, sometimes adventurous, sometimes cautious. More commonly, if the situation in the impoverished, they are more willing to take risks; to the extent of the family was well off, they often become indecisive, and unwilling to act rashly. It is said that even if the same person, whether it is \
American philosopher John Rawls (J. Rawls), for \ He used a vivid metaphor to demonstrate \ Rolls said it had been born wealthy, was born in shabby homes, all are out of chance, can only be resigned; but in reincarnation before,
nike air force one low, if people can come together, how they will reach agreement?
Rawls concluded,
air force 1 low shoes, because everyone is ignorant of their own future destiny, in order to avoid risks, even if everyone is selfish, and they will certainly reach a \ points, \
Rawls this on the \ My question is: even if there is a case of meeting,
air force one, at which agreed unanimously that people really will be \ The answer is not,
air force 1 shoes! As long as some of them are \ After all, even in real life, we have not seen after voluntary After buying tickets, but also requires all participants to split the prize of the crowd.