Dear SteelRedux,

<<In that case the split would be 96 to the head BR, 2 to the third BR and 2 to the least senior.>

Correct!

As to the last scenario:

A. Being sick in bed is not like being shot. My assumption is that a bushranger's 1st priority is to remain alive, 2nd priority is to maximise their loot and 3rd to see the other bushrangers dead.

B. If one's share of the loot goes to charity (because they are sick in bed), it affects him alone. It is a disincentive for him (which is included in my calculations), but not an incentive to the others.

C. Correct. If the chance to be sick is 90% then the chance that the whole loot will go to charity is 59%. However, 90% illness is unrealistic, in an average winter you should find only about 2-3% having a flu.

One crucial point is, that any bushranger's first goal would be to eliminate their possibility of being killed. The senior bushranger therefore needs ALL others to agree to their proposal, because otherwise, they risk that their subset of favourites may all happen to be sick on the day!

The most interesting result, is that the 3rd-ranking bushranger, who if the sickness-rate is 10% or less cannot make a sufficient offer to the 4th and 5th, would do everything to avoid the position of making a proposal. Thus he would accept whatever the 1st proposes, even if he didn't receive anything, because if he votes against it and the 1st is shot, then the 2nd may happen to be sick and the burden of proposing falls on him, in which case he can consider himself dead.

Hi Steelie,

You said, <<All I included here were the figures >>.

So no opinion, yours or otherwise was offered?

Then you said, <<There was no opinion offered in my quote from Huffington Post>>
Posted by SteeleRedux, Wednesday, 26 March 2014 9:19:13 PM

Then you said, <<The opinion offered below that quote was mine>>
Posted by SteeleRedux, Wednesday, 26 March 2014 9:19:13 PM

Then you said, <<I did not post any opinion from Zueese all I posted was a summary he made of the Credit Suisse Global Wealth Databook>>.
Posted by SteeleRedux, Friday, 28 March 2014 4:38:37 PM

You have a choice on all these. Either you prove me right that you borrowed the opinion of Zueese by offering us a “summary” of his opinion, or this was a non-opinion of yours because there was no opinion offered from the Huffington Post article, or the opinion you offered is in fact yours, but not really, or you offered no opinion at all and you just offered OLO’ers an opinion that was indeed “yours”, but it was not connected to the Huffington Post, Zueese or the “Wealth Databook”? Duh!

Did I get that right?

I’m sure that “your own” comments must be a bit overwhelming for you however, for the third time of posting I will simplify the question you refuse to answer;

What is the difference between private, institutional and corporate wealth?

Now how simple is it to answer such a question? Especially since it is the whole basis for your thread!

We are in awe that you have an Uncle, that you use Wikipedia as a source of your intellectual capacity, that you do a << a lot of work on building sites>> , and that in Victoria the people on building sites don’t think like OLO’ers.

There is a message for YOU in all this.

Try to avoid OLO, building site intellect, Uncles, Zueese, Wikipedia, other peoples’ opinion, whacky backie, Green manifesto pamphlets, critical thinking, reality, computer keyboards and anything written by Lewis Carol.

Idiot

Dear spindoc,

It seems I lay things out quite clearly for you then you go and muddle things up all over again. I mean what of earth is this?

“Either you prove me right that you borrowed the opinion of Zueese by offering us a “summary” of his opinion, or this was a non-opinion of yours because there was no opinion offered from the Huffington Post article, or the opinion you offered is in fact yours, but not really, or you offered no opinion at all and you just offered OLO’ers an opinion that was indeed “yours”, but it was not connected to the Huffington Post, Zueese or the “Wealth Databook”?”

Sorry old chap but I don't have an earthly clue what you are trying to say, couldn't finish the rest of your post because my head was hurting so much. Remember mate clarity is your friend when you are trying to make a point. I listed my opinions for you many posts ago but you have just ignored them and keep banging on about Zueese. It's about time you let go of that bone ol' fella.

As to calling me an 'idiot' well you have to know that cut me to the quick. Here I was espousing how unique you lot are and you start slinging insults. But then again it is exactly what makes you guys so special, I mean if one goes to the zoo to see the Tassy Devils one really doesn't want to see them all docile and cute or if you sit down to see an episode of 'Married with Children' you really want Al Bundy at his miserable best. Actually, wait a moment...spindoc=Al Bundy...? Oh yes! Lol.

Dear Yutusu,

Ah ha. I see why I was having a problem. When you said “first-ranking bushranger is sick, they stay in bed, alive but getting no share of the loot” I had assumed he could not be shot but I take it he can be killed. In any case if he is not present why do the lesser bushrangers need to include him at all?

Dear Yuyutsu,

I think you might enjoy this little clip. It is from the game Golden Balls. At the end of the show two players face off over a sum of money, in this case 13,000 pounds.

Each has a choice of choosing 'split' or 'steal'. If both choose split they divided the cash, if both choose steal they each walk away with nothing but if one picks steal and the other split then the 'stealer' walks away with the lot.

Player 2 adopts an interesting strategy.

http://youtu.be/S0qjK3TWZE8

‘morning Steelie,

Fourth time of posting the question;

“What is the difference between private, institutional and corporate wealth?

How is the answer to the question coming along?

In response to the litany of excuses you said << Sorry old chap but I don't have an earthly clue what you are trying to say, couldn't finish the rest of your post because my head was hurting so much. >>

Now you know how the rest of us feel, they were all YOUR excuses I pulled them from your posts!

How’s your headache now?

ITS funny how some measure wealth
and other measure values

REGARDLESS..THE QUESTION/HAS BECOME..<<..
“What is the difference between private,>>wealth

OK PRIVATE WEALTH..IS A PERSONAL BURDEN..OR ADVANTAGE
SOME PUT HIGHER WORTH ON THE Quality..0THERS ON THE Quantity
BUT AT THE HUMANE LEVEL..[even moral]..Levels..ITS ALL BY PERSONAL CHOICE..personal control..personal accounting

remembering that some got their wealth/by fair mean
others by foul..THESE ARE CONDITIONAL FACTORS RE THE WEALTH measure
the individual HAS ASSETS AND MAY BE SUED FOR FUlL RECOVERY OF DAMAGES

UNLESS THEY HID THE WEALTH..IN A PRIVATE TRUST..OR corperation
often pathetically enough a trust free charity..OR MASKING AS A PERSONAL FACE.UNDER Cooperate Limited liabilities

<<..institutional>.WEALTH..IS THE VALUE OF THE CORPORATION/MINUS ITS OBLIGATIONS[MOST 'INSTITUTIONS ARE LEVERAGED TO THE Max[often LEASING Back their own BUSINESS NAME //LEASING back THEIR OWN SHOP AND BUYING THEIR Own product..into av tax free trust held in amsterdam London or any number of tax avoidance.lurks..govt has given to corperate 'PERSON'[WHO/TOOK THE ADVANTAGES OF PERSON HOOD..AWAY FROM THE LIVING/TO BAILOUT THE DEAD corporate PERSON/under the act

<<>.and..corporate wealth?>JUST AS ALL OTHER FORMS OF NON LIVING PERSONAL/WEALTH..BELONGS TO THE SHAREHOLDER/TRUST[Except where thaT Shareholding is held by other corperate'person'HOOD

[ie a wealth sucking AWAY AT PUBLIC 'trust'..run by mindless over paid criminals with too much dishonor in their true name/.thus hide under a corporate vail.

How is..the REAL/question coming along?