In a twin conspiracy, a pair of identical twins would pretend to be only one person. For example, in college each twin could specialize in, and then ace, half of the classes; their GPA would soar. They might together make partner in a law firm by handling a lot more work than other lawyers. They could cheat on their spouse while offering that spouse a near-constant video of “their” activities. In fact, they could always have an alibi for anything they did.
"Twins' DNA foils police - Police found a DNA sample at a crime scene only for their investigation to stall when they discovering it belongs to one of a pair of identical twins."
The one area where a twin conspiracy seems to me to pay off is in studying for qualifications. Two twins co-study for a qualification, and then go off and live their own lives, each now in possession of the qualification that they have done only half the work for.
So they each get a higher score / more advanced qualification / in less time than they could have managed on their own. Yes, they each individually only covered part of the syllabus so there are holes in their knowledge but outside of academia who really ever gets tested on that.
But everyone who knows two individual twins who were brought up together knows that identical twins are distinct people from each other, each with their own personality and some slight differences in looks. The CEO's colleagues would notice. (See Judith Harris's "No Two Alike" where she discusses the cases of identical twins brought up together, along with the more famous examples of identical twins brought up separately).
And also, how would these two identical twins cope with disagreements between them on how to handle all sorts of decisions?
What would be the point? You would have to share your income without twice the personal tax allowance so most of it would be taxed at 50% and you only get half of half. Plus, which of you gets to sleep with the gorgeous spouse each night? Yes, you could cheat on your wife (or husband) but you also have to share her/him in the first place.
I also agree with a previous commentator that nobody would mind if there were two of you doing the job, as long as you were doing it well and taking only one salary. What's for the shareholders not to like?
Nah, if I were a twin, I might use the situation better to complete the perfect one-off bank heist: even if you were caught, as long as you each claimed it was the other and "you" were the one at the opera (with lots of witnesses), then the case couldn't be proved beyond reasonable doubt against either of you...even with DNA evidence and CCTV footage, so you both get off :-)
"You are clearly (although implicitly) saying that there are massive economies of scale to some labor markets, whereby two people can be several times as productive as one person. I just don’t think this is plausible. In winner take all markets, what matters is the skill of one person, not how many people you have. Two mediocre basketball playing twins could not get nearly Michael Jordan’s salary, and two mediocre manager twins could not match the productivity of a good CEO."
I think asymmetric information would be the best reason. The twins give all the appearances of being highly talented, which end in them getting a high paying job that they're not necessarily that great at, but monitoring difficulties allow them to get away with it.
Heh, this is actually the plot for the movie Marked for Death, where the leader of a Jamaican drug cartel is actually two people who are twin brothers. ("The secret to his magic is that he has two heads and four eyes.") "He" is, of course, amazingly effective.
When the protagonist kills "the" leader and presents his severed head to the rest of the gang, they're shocked ... until the twin finally reveals his existence and walks in the scene.
Do people really care that much more about autonomy than success?
Possibly. Success is a far goal, while the loss of automony is a near, everyday occurence, that you can never relax from. Hedonistic treadmill type arguments would imply that the everyday rewards of success could never compete with this; only those with inhuman discipline could keep their eyes focused on the far goal of success.
If you check a CEO schedule, the only way to attend twice as many meetings would be to attend two meetings simultaneously. This will create problems, guaranteed, because a lot of the people the CEO talks to will know other people if there are such huge gains to be had.
"Twins' DNA foils police - Police found a DNA sample at a crime scene only for their investigation to stall when they discovering it belongs to one of a pair of identical twins."
- http://www.telegraph.co.uk/...
This is a joke right? lol
The one area where a twin conspiracy seems to me to pay off is in studying for qualifications. Two twins co-study for a qualification, and then go off and live their own lives, each now in possession of the qualification that they have done only half the work for.
So they each get a higher score / more advanced qualification / in less time than they could have managed on their own. Yes, they each individually only covered part of the syllabus so there are holes in their knowledge but outside of academia who really ever gets tested on that.
But everyone who knows two individual twins who were brought up together knows that identical twins are distinct people from each other, each with their own personality and some slight differences in looks. The CEO's colleagues would notice. (See Judith Harris's "No Two Alike" where she discusses the cases of identical twins brought up together, along with the more famous examples of identical twins brought up separately).
And also, how would these two identical twins cope with disagreements between them on how to handle all sorts of decisions?
What would be the point? You would have to share your income without twice the personal tax allowance so most of it would be taxed at 50% and you only get half of half. Plus, which of you gets to sleep with the gorgeous spouse each night? Yes, you could cheat on your wife (or husband) but you also have to share her/him in the first place.
I also agree with a previous commentator that nobody would mind if there were two of you doing the job, as long as you were doing it well and taking only one salary. What's for the shareholders not to like?
Nah, if I were a twin, I might use the situation better to complete the perfect one-off bank heist: even if you were caught, as long as you each claimed it was the other and "you" were the one at the opera (with lots of witnesses), then the case couldn't be proved beyond reasonable doubt against either of you...even with DNA evidence and CCTV footage, so you both get off :-)
Very well said.
"You are clearly (although implicitly) saying that there are massive economies of scale to some labor markets, whereby two people can be several times as productive as one person. I just don’t think this is plausible. In winner take all markets, what matters is the skill of one person, not how many people you have. Two mediocre basketball playing twins could not get nearly Michael Jordan’s salary, and two mediocre manager twins could not match the productivity of a good CEO."
I think asymmetric information would be the best reason. The twins give all the appearances of being highly talented, which end in them getting a high paying job that they're not necessarily that great at, but monitoring difficulties allow them to get away with it.
Heh, this is actually the plot for the movie Marked for Death, where the leader of a Jamaican drug cartel is actually two people who are twin brothers. ("The secret to his magic is that he has two heads and four eyes.") "He" is, of course, amazingly effective.
When the protagonist kills "the" leader and presents his severed head to the rest of the gang, they're shocked ... until the twin finally reveals his existence and walks in the scene.
Oh, and sorry for the spoilers.
Even if it were feasible (as others have pointed out, it isn't) the twin frequency among CEOs test isn't particularly useful.
Having an identical twin would clearly be huge influence on someone, how are you going to control for that many confounders?
They could cheat on their spouse and while offering that spouse a near-constant video of “their” activities.
Identical twins aren't that identical.
Cronenberg's "Dead Ringers" has twins sharing one life.
Oh, but it is; just read Julian Simon. :-)
We use the gains from our production to live the life we want to.
What is success if not autonomy?
Do people really care that much more about autonomy than success?
Possibly. Success is a far goal, while the loss of automony is a near, everyday occurence, that you can never relax from. Hedonistic treadmill type arguments would imply that the everyday rewards of success could never compete with this; only those with inhuman discipline could keep their eyes focused on the far goal of success.
If you check a CEO schedule, the only way to attend twice as many meetings would be to attend two meetings simultaneously. This will create problems, guaranteed, because a lot of the people the CEO talks to will know other people if there are such huge gains to be had.
The explanation I've heard for that is so the peons will work harder in the hopes of getting that bigger paycheck... but that also works.