Open in app
Cover art for Why we take bigger risks when someone else pays

Why we take bigger risks when someone else pays

Economics · 5 min listen

Get the app on mobile
Download on the App Store Get it on Google Play
Cover art for Why we take bigger risks when someone else pays
0:00
0:00
Transcript

HostIt's funny how we think safety gear always makes things safer. Like when cars first got seatbelts and much better brakes. You would think crashes would just go away, but people actually started driving faster and following the car in front of them much closer because they felt so safe.

GuestIt's a strange bit of human nature. When we feel like the floor is padded, we tend to jump from higher up. In the world of money and insurance, they have a name for this. They call it moral hazard. It basically means that when you're not the one who has to pay for a mistake, you stop being so careful. The downside of a risky move gets shifted to someone else, but if you win, you still get to keep the reward. So, the cost of a mistake drops toward zero while the prize for a gamble stays high. It's like playing poker with someone else’s chips. You'll stay at the table much longer than you would if it was your own rent money on the line.

HostThat name sounds a bit judgmental, though. Is this just about people being shady or dishonest?

GuestThat's actually how the term started back in the eighteen hundreds. Insurance companies used it to describe people they thought were crooks. They were worried a shady character might buy fire insurance and then intentionally burn down their own warehouse just to get the cash. But today, the way we look at it has shifted. It's not really about whether you're a good or bad person. It's about the way the rules are set up. We all react to the costs and rewards in front of us. If you change the cost of a risk, people will change how they act. It's a rational move, even if the outcome looks bad from the outside.

HostI still feel like there's an easy fix for that. If I'm the one paying for your mistakes, I should just watch you. If you start driving like a maniac, I'll just cancel your insurance.

GuestWell, that's the big hurdle. We call that information asymmetry. It basically just means one person knows a lot more about what they're doing than the person who's looking out for them. An insurance company can't sit in the passenger seat for every mile you drive. They don't know if you're looking at your phone or taking corners too fast until after the crash happens. You see this at work, too. It's what people call shirking. If a worker gets a steady salary no matter how much they get done, they might spend a rainy afternoon doing as little as possible. The boss can't watch every single move they make, so the worker takes a hidden risk by being lazy, knowing their paycheck is safe regardless.

HostSo it's about what we can get away with when no one is looking. But even if we're being watched, like with those seatbelts we talked about, we still act out. Why is that?

GuestThat's something called the Peltzman Effect. It's named after a man who studied how safety rules, like making seatbelts mandatory, didn't actually save as many lives as everyone hoped. He found that when drivers feel safer, they subconsciously turn up the heat. They drive faster or brake much later because the cost of a crash feels lower to them. It's almost like we have an internal risk thermostat. When we put on a seatbelt, it's like we're turning down the danger in the room. To get back to the level of excitement or speed we like, we turn the dial back up by driving more dangerously. We don't just take the extra safety and stay calm; we use that safety as a shield so we can take bigger risks.

HostThat sounds like a disaster when you think about really big things, like the whole economy. If a huge bank knows they're safe, do they just go wild?

GuestThat's exactly what happens, and it creates a huge mess for everyone. When a bank gets so big that its failure would wreck the whole country, they know the government will likely step in to save them. This is the too big to fail problem. It creates a heads I win, tails you lose situation. The bank can make massive, risky bets and keep all the profits if they win. But if they lose, the public ends up paying for the bailout. To stop this, we try to make sure people have skin in the game. That's why your health insurance has a co-pay or your car insurance has a deductible. Those fees aren't just there to be annoying. They're there to make sure you still feel a little bit of the sting if something goes wrong. It forces you to act like you're still responsible for the risk you're taking.

GuestThe goal is to make sure that the person taking the gamble is always the one who feels the burn if the dice don't go their way.

HostThe seatbelt only works if we still remember that the road is dangerous, even when we feel buckled in and safe.

Made with Wander

A world of curiosity you can listen to. Explore endless questions, or ask your own.

Get the app