Inside Job : Rational Choice Theory

Section Two: 1. The documentary, “Inside Job” provides an interpretation of the causes and consequences of the 2008 global financial crisis. Is this interpretation compelling? Be sure to include institutional, ideological and interest factors in your analysis. The movie, the

When it comes down to it, we all make our own decisions. We weigh the pros and cons to decide if the benefits outweigh the potential punishments. The idea of rational choice theory is that people choose their actions based on the options available and choose the one they most prefer. If their choice is to eat a donut or to not, when they really want to eat it, chances are they will eat it. Once you add in punishment, it gets more complicated. If the person were to be punished for eating it, they will most likely think it through more. Say, it’s a teenager who wants to eat the donut but he knows his father will ground him if he does. This donut is the teen’s favorite kind and he really really wants to eat the donut, but the risk of punishment is there, the teen will weigh the consequences against the benefits. Would he choose a few minutes of a tasty donut and risk being grounded for a week or would he choose to forgo the donut and not get in trouble? The act of having a choice to do something you want to do that also has consequences and causes you to rationally decide if it’s worth it or not is rational choice theory.

While watching Taken, a criminal justice major can pick out several different examples of criminological theories. However, the theory I found to be the most relevant was the rational choice theory. Several sociologists and criminologists believe that an individual’s decision to commit a crime is determined by several personal reasons. Those who strongly enforce the rational choice theory believe that an individual who is considering criminal behavior first decides whether or not he/she is willing to become

Kahneman’s article is an analysis of intuitive thinking and how it guides our decision-making. Although primarily aimed at the field of psychology, it is an interdisciplinary article with applications in economic theorising. Kahneman attempts to differentiate between two systems of thought, one of intuition (system 1) and one of reasoning (system 2), and argues that many judgements and choices are made intuitively, rather than with reason (a slower and more deliberate process). Intuitive decision making, which encompasses heuristics, although generally more efficient and rapid, makes the agent potentially subject to errors due to framing effects or violations of dominance. The analysis of the studies and theoretical situations also provides criticism of the commonly held model of the rational agent within economics. The article also further conceptualises Kahneman’s theory, the Prospect Theory (Kahneman & Tversky, 1979), which has descriptive applications of people’s choice in decision-making situations involving risk and known probability of outcomes. These situations are typically unexplained by the more normative rational agent model.

My example of the rational choice theory of today is the mexican drug controls of December 2011. The drug trafficking organization in Mexico was highly rational, self-interested actors seeked to maximize profit.

Rational choice theory is a criminology theory designed by Derek Cornish and Ronald Clark which states that before people commit a crime they think about what they are going to do (Snook, Dhami, & Kavanagh, 2011). They consider the pros and cons before performing the criminal action. The entire premise of the rational choice theory is that each individual, regardless of whether rich, poor, educated, or uneducated, all utilize rationality when making the decision to commit a crime (Taylor, 2013). The rational choice theory postulates that when a person weighs the costs and benefits of a crime, that person decides whether or not the benefits are worth the risk. It is about maximizing his or her own self-interest (Jacques & Wright, 2010). The

Rational choice theory was first discovered in the mid-eighteenth century and was originally referred to as classical theory. Philosopher Jeremy Bentham and scholar César Beccaria, were some of the first to analyze and investigate this theory. In order to determine whether or not a dichotomous relationship exists between an individual’s free will and their decision to commit a crime. One must first consider whether that individual has control over making a rational decision. During this time offenders were considered to be rational, therefore the punishment received for the crime committed, must significantly

In this essay, I will briefly explain what happened during the financial crisis of 2007-09, and also discuss the contribution of the government to the financial crisis.

One of the primary factors that can be attributed as to have led the recent financial crisis is the financial deregulation allowing financial institutions a lot of freedom in the way they operated. The manifestation of this was seen in the form of:

What caused the financial crisis to happen? The origin of the crisis, the film argues, can be traced back to the 1980s, when the process of deregulation was eagerly implemented under the Reagan Era. Prior to the emergence of Reaganomics, the financial industry was tightly regulated following the Great Depression. Most of the banks were local and were prohibited from speculating customers’ deposits (brought by the Glass-Steagall Act), while the investment banks were modest and private. However, everything changed after 1980, when Ronald Reagan became president and the U.S economy entered a thirty-year phase of deregulation. Financial institutions, which included commercial and investment banks then embarked on the process of maximizing profit by making risky investments with the depositors’ money. By the end of the decade, saving and loans companies went bankrupt, causing tax payers to lose more than one hundred billion dollars. However, the government did not implement any reform and deregulation continued to take place under the Clinton

The topic I have chosen to write this research paper over is the rational choice theory. The rational choice theory started with the work of Cesare Beccaria in the late eighteenth century. From that point forward, the theory has been developed and opened up to incorporate different viewpoints, like discouragement and routine activity theory. The rational choice theory is a monetary rule that expresses that people dependably settle on reasonable and legitimate choices. These choices furnish individuals with the best advantage or fulfillment, given the decisions accessible and are likewise in their most elevated self-interest.

Rational choice theory, also known simply as choice theory, is the assessment of a potential offender to commit a crime. Choice theory is the belief that committing a crime is a rational decision, based on cost benefit analysis. The would-be offender will weigh the costs of committing a particular crime: fines, jail time, and imprisonment versus the benefits: money, status, heightened adrenaline. Depending on which factors out-weigh the other, a criminal will decide to commit or forgo committing a crime. This decision making process makes committing a crime a rational choice. This theory can be used to explain why an offender will decide to commit burglary, robbery, aggravated assault, or murder.

There has been a debate for years on what caused the Financial Crisis in 2008 and if there was one main cause, or a series of unfortunate events that led to the crisis. The crisis began when the market was no longer funding many financial entities. The Federal Reserve then lowered the federal funds rate from 5.25% to almost zero percent in December 2008. The Federal Government realized that this was not enough and decided to bail out Bear Stearns, which inhibited JP Morgan Chase to buy Bear Stearns. Unfortunately Bear Stearns was not the only financial entity that needed saving, Lehman Brothers needed help as well. Lehman Brothers was twice the size of Bear Stearns and the government could not bail them out. Lehman Brothers declared bankruptcy on September 15, 2008. Lehman Brothers bankruptcy caused the market tensions to become disastrous. The Fed then had to bail out American International Group the day after Lehman Brothers failed (Poole, 2010). Some blame poor policy making and others blame the government. The main causes of the financial crisis are the deregulation of banks and bank corruption.

The new lackadaisical lending requirements and low interest rates drove housing prices higher, which only made the mortgage backed securities and CDOs seem like an even better investment. Now consider the housing market which had become a housing bubble, which had now burst, and now people could not pay for their incredibly expensive houses or keep up with their ballooning mortgage payments. Borrowers started defaulting, which put more houses back on the market for sale. But there were not any buyers. Supply was up, demand was down, and home prices started collapsing. As prices fell, some borrowers suddenly had a mortgage for way more than their home was currently worth and some stopped paying. That led to more defaults, pushing prices down further. As this was happening, the big financial institutions stopped buying sub-prime mortgages and sub-prime lenders were getting stuck with bad loans. By 2007, some big lenders had declared bankruptcy. The problems spread to the big investors, who had poured money into the mortgage backed securities and CDOs. They started losing money on their investments. All these of these financial instruments resulted in an incredibly complicated web of assets, liabilities, and risks. So that when things went bad, they went bad for the entire financial system. Some major financial players declared bankruptcy and others were forced into mergers, or needed

First I will provide an overview of what rational choice theory is and why it has staked such a prominent position in the discipline of political science. In this section I conclude that rational choice theory has indeed developed advanced methodologies at telling us how rational agents should behave. Then in my second section I will show, using the empirical case of the free-rider problem and collective action, as well as the case of suicide terrorism, that rational choice theory cannot adequately account for actual political phenomena. In my third section I will provide some reasons for why this is the case. Finally, in my concluding section I will posit a theoretical framework incorporating some refinements to the assumptions behind rational choice theory that would better aid a predictive (but not universalist) political science.