Options #1-
Economists are often blamed as cruel and calculating. This section makes it feel that economists consider consumers to be human calculators to maximize their welfare.
How would you explain the following paradox? Economic theory assumes that consumers always want more, and their resources constrain them. (If they had $1 more, they would find a way to spend it and increase their happiness). If that’s the case, how would you explain charity? Aren’t consumers simply throwing away an opportunity to increase their utility?
Option #2
Consumers go to a restaurant (pretend they are traveling to a place they will never go to again) in Miami. They eat their meal and have received all their benefit from the meal. What would explain why a consumer may tip after the services have been received? They expect that they will never be back in Miami, the meal is over, and keeping the tip money would allow them to buy something else.
(Hint: I’m NOT looking for a sociological answer of “it’s the cultural expectation to tip,” or the “Servers aren’t paid much, so they expect that I tip.” I want an economical answer on why the giver would tip/donate.)
