Even if the questions were worded well, it's still impossible to devise a fair way of aggregating the voters' rankings of three or more options. (Arrow's impossibility theorem)

Ragettho (talk)16:58, 9 November 2012

I've heard this claim before. From what I understand of the point, the meaning behind it has two distinct parts: one to do with the information content of poll results, the other to do with the vagueness of the concept of fairness. Those two parts should really be kept separate. The most useful question to ask about a poll like this is, what does this tell us about respondents' thinking?

Pi zero (talk)17:26, 9 November 2012
 

Very, very interesting!! It's funny to me, how, the deeper you get into Economics, the closer it starts to become metaphysical/spiritual/religious-like in design!

Bddpaux (talk)17:21, 15 November 2012

Three guys die and go to Heaven, where they're greeted by Albert Einstein. Einstein asks the first guy, "What's your IQ?" The guy answers, "170." "Wonderful!", says Einstein, "We can spend eternity discussing theoretical physics!" He asks the second, "What's your IQ?" The second guy answers, "270." "Wonderful! We can spend eternity discussing economic theory!" He asks the third, "What's your IQ?" The third guy answers, "70." Einstein shakes his hand warmly. "Glad to meet you! What stocks do you like?"

Pi zero (talk)20:42, 15 November 2012

Totally love that.....laughed VERY LOUDLY at that one. Not quite as funny, but no less true is another favorite of mine: "There's no such thing as a brother-in-law who's ever lost money in the stock market."

Bddpaux (talk)22:06, 15 November 2012

Nice.  :-)

Pi zero (talk)22:42, 15 November 2012