No- I don’t.
When I make plans or strategize for myself, I’m maximizing my utility in terms of meal enjoyment and minimizing the physical and psychological costs of potential grossly overeating (an 90%+ probability)
When my plans affect others (ie restaurant choices or ordering dishes for a shared meal), my choices- limiting the quantities of foods I tend to overindulge on and ordering primarily stuff they enjoy but I’m not tempted by- results in a meal that they enjoy more or would at least be indifferent to when compared to a meal in which they chose the restaurant or dishes.
Any additional utility they would derive from increasing the temptation level on my part comes at a psychological cost to me. They do not incur such psychological costs and if anything, the more variety of “delicious foods”, the better. Also, the decision making seems to impose a psychological cost on them, which is probably why they often outsource the task to me in the first place
This is a large part of why I’m the “family foodie”
Given that everyone’s utility is maximized, I don’t see anything wrong with it.
Sorry for the long post- and wow, I think I’ve spent way too much time reading Econ,
Yes, I actually think like this