A.14 Revealed preference | Consumption - Microeconomics 

Thanks +Brendan P !

I agree with this - however in the revealed preference context I think what is meant is more that if you observe one bundle (A) while another one (B) was affordable the entire time, then that bundle (A) is revealed preferred to the other (B). It doesn't seem to have anything to do with budget lines except the budget line shows which bundles were not affordable. And since you can't tell the difference between a not preferred bundle and a not affordable bundle, scooting around the budget curve for is useful for demonstrating transitivity (strong axiom). It seems to me like the idea was mostly right but just the wording could be redone.

Thanks for watching!

Thanks!

jack whack no as the preferred point is where the indifference curve is tangential to the BC. As B doesn't lie on the BC it cannot be chosen as there is no where for the IC to be a tangent to it

Hello! Bro, it's a shit concept of economists. They say that you MUST ALWAYS USE ALL YOUR BUDGET, and the choice where you use all your budget is the best choice. The concept "The more is better" is like a GOD among economists. Suppose you go to a restaurant and buy 3 pizza and 3 cokes. If you can afford 4 pizza and 4 cokes, economists say that this is your preffered bundle, because you bought more, they don't care if you can eat and drink 4 cokes and 4 pizzas, they keep saying that this is your best choice.

That's why NEVER EVER YOU CAN HAVE A Px/Py>MRSxy. In economists' mind you have 2 options: You can like a bundle that you afford and you spend all your money on it or you can like a bundle that you don't afford. They don't accept you to like a bundle where you spend less than your income. So, if you earn 1 million $ per year, from economists point of view you must preffer a Ferrari 458 Italia (which is 1 million euro) or a Buggati Chiron (which is 2 million euro). You can't like a 35k Honda Accord, it's impossible from their point of view. I know, it's something really stupid and it has nothing to do with reality, but that's microeconomics in the beggining, as the time pass, you'll learn that you can save money or borrow money (that's even more idiotic, if you have money for a Ferrari but you preffer the Bugatti, you have to borrow money to buy that Bugatti, doesn't matter you'll pay your whole damn life for the credit, it's economics, you can't contradict it :)))). Oh, and you can't be on a diet if you respect microeconomics principles. If your monthly budget for food is 2k$ you have to spend all of it to meet your preffered choice, you can't soend less and eat less, you must be fat and sick but respect the tangency rule :)))).

I wanna reiterate that the video is great though, even if I had some funny questions about it, the video still really helped put things in the right perspective

Thanks for watching Saurabh Roy!