<p>I'm new to microeconomics so sorry if this is simplistic, but if an action should only be taken when benefits &gt; costs and opportunity costs are included in cost calculations, how would one deal with situations that arise when implicit costs make either choice not worth doing? For example, if you have the option to see a movie or go bowling at the same time, and the movie ticket is 10 dollars with 12 dollar benefit and the bowling entry is 15 dollars with 17 dollar benefit, wouldn't that make the costs (including opportunity cost) of the movie 27 and bowling 27, both higher than their benefits, so a person should choose to do neither? This seems illogical so I'm sure I am missing something.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2020-07-13T18:23:57.820Z
If a person has only the two options and  not any better ones rational person will minimize the pain (i.e. negative utility/disutility).
1muflon1
<microeconomics><consumer-theory>
Can implicit costs make every option not worth doing?
Jack
# Can implicit costs make every option not worth doing?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2020-07-13)

I'm new to microeconomics so sorry if this is simplistic, but if an action should only be taken when benefits > costs and opportunity costs are included in cost calculations, how would one deal with situations that arise when implicit costs make either choice not worth doing? For example, if you have the option to see a movie or go bowling at the same time, and the movie ticket is 10 dollars with 12 dollar benefit and the bowling entry is 15 dollars with 17 dollar benefit, wouldn't that make the costs (including opportunity cost) of the movie 27 and bowling 27, both higher than their benefits, so a person should choose to do neither? This seems illogical so I'm sure I am missing something.

**Tags:** microeconomics, consumer-theory
> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: If a person has only the two options and  not any better ones rational person will minimize the pain (i.e. negative utility/disutility).  

---

## 0 answers

