An idiom to describe a situation where, in a group of people with shared resources, everyone takes some but...
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty{ margin-bottom:0;
}
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I'm sure that there is an idiom that describes the following scenario:
A group of people share a pool of resources (be it food, water, money, etc.). There is the general consensus that in order to stretch out the resources as much as possible, each person should only take a fair amount, sometimes taking none at all.
However, the outcome is that only one person follows through restricting their consumption, and everyone else does not. As a result, the status quo has changed from everyone taking what they can get, to this one person unintentionally getting less than everyone else.
I thought that this was the Tragedy of the Commons, but it isn't. It is very similar in terms of the concept of resources shared between a group, however.
phrase-requests idioms idiom-requests
asked 2 days ago
gsamerica
11
New contributor
gsamerica is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I'm sure that there is an idiom that describes the following scenario:
A group of people share a pool of resources (be it food, water, money, etc.). There is the general consensus that in order to stretch out the resources as much as possible, each person should only take a fair amount, sometimes taking none at all.
However, the outcome is that only one person follows through restricting their consumption, and everyone else does not. As a result, the status quo has changed from everyone taking what they can get, to this one person unintentionally getting less than everyone else.
I thought that this was the Tragedy of the Commons, but it isn't. It is very similar in terms of the concept of resources shared between a group, however.
phrase-requests idioms idiom-requests
asked 2 days ago
gsamerica
11
New contributor
gsamerica is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
If everybody takes only what they need, and one or more people don't need any but others need some, then one or more not taking any would be quite fine. Although I think I know what you're asking, you're confusing several different ideas. A fair share does not mean an equal share. (And different people may have different ideas of what's fair.) But if something is agreed to and one or more people don't follow through, then those who don't are reneging on the agreement.
– Jason Bassford
2 days ago
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I'm sure that there is an idiom that describes the following scenario:
A group of people share a pool of resources (be it food, water, money, etc.). There is the general consensus that in order to stretch out the resources as much as possible, each person should only take a fair amount, sometimes taking none at all.
However, the outcome is that only one person follows through restricting their consumption, and everyone else does not. As a result, the status quo has changed from everyone taking what they can get, to this one person unintentionally getting less than everyone else.
I thought that this was the Tragedy of the Commons, but it isn't. It is very similar in terms of the concept of resources shared between a group, however.
phrase-requests idioms idiom-requests
asked 2 days ago
gsamerica
11
New contributor
gsamerica is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
I'm sure that there is an idiom that describes the following scenario:
A group of people share a pool of resources (be it food, water, money, etc.). There is the general consensus that in order to stretch out the resources as much as possible, each person should only take a fair amount, sometimes taking none at all.
However, the outcome is that only one person follows through restricting their consumption, and everyone else does not. As a result, the status quo has changed from everyone taking what they can get, to this one person unintentionally getting less than everyone else.
I thought that this was the Tragedy of the Commons, but it isn't. It is very similar in terms of the concept of resources shared between a group, however.
phrase-requests idioms idiom-requests
phrase-requests idioms idiom-requests
asked 2 days ago
gsamerica
11
New contributor
gsamerica is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 2 days ago
gsamerica
11
New contributor
gsamerica is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 2 days ago
gsamerica
11
New contributor
gsamerica is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 2 days ago
gsamerica
11
asked 2 days ago
gsamerica
11
11
New contributor
gsamerica is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
gsamerica is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
gsamerica is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
If everybody takes only what they need, and one or more people don't need any but others need some, then one or more not taking any would be quite fine. Although I think I know what you're asking, you're confusing several different ideas. A fair share does not mean an equal share. (And different people may have different ideas of what's fair.) But if something is agreed to and one or more people don't follow through, then those who don't are reneging on the agreement.
– Jason Bassford
2 days ago
add a comment |
If everybody takes only what they need, and one or more people don't need any but others need some, then one or more not taking any would be quite fine. Although I think I know what you're asking, you're confusing several different ideas. A fair share does not mean an equal share. (And different people may have different ideas of what's fair.) But if something is agreed to and one or more people don't follow through, then those who don't are reneging on the agreement.
– Jason Bassford
2 days ago
If everybody takes only what they need, and one or more people don't need any but others need some, then one or more not taking any would be quite fine. Although I think I know what you're asking, you're confusing several different ideas. A fair share does not mean an equal share. (And different people may have different ideas of what's fair.) But if something is agreed to and one or more people don't follow through, then those who don't are reneging on the agreement.
– Jason Bassford
2 days ago
If everybody takes only what they need, and one or more people don't need any but others need some, then one or more not taking any would be quite fine. Although I think I know what you're asking, you're confusing several different ideas. A fair share does not mean an equal share. (And different people may have different ideas of what's fair.) But if something is agreed to and one or more people don't follow through, then those who don't are reneging on the agreement.
– Jason Bassford
2 days ago
add a comment |
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
gsamerica is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
gsamerica is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
gsamerica is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
gsamerica is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f472849%2fan-idiom-to-describe-a-situation-where-in-a-group-of-people-with-shared-resourc%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
If everybody takes only what they need, and one or more people don't need any but others need some, then one or more not taking any would be quite fine. Although I think I know what you're asking, you're confusing several different ideas. A fair share does not mean an equal share. (And different people may have different ideas of what's fair.) But if something is agreed to and one or more people don't follow through, then those who don't are reneging on the agreement.
– Jason Bassford
2 days ago