Margen
In 1997, psychologists Eldar Shafir and Amos Tversky and economist Peter Diamond posed a dilemma: Ann gets a 2% raise in a year with no inflation; Barbara gets 5% with 4% inflation. In real terms, Ann comes out ahead. Yet most people thought Barbara was happier — and less likely to quit her job.
Irving Fisher had already named the trick in 1928: the money illusion. We think in nominal euros — the number printed on the payslip — not in what those euros can buy.
The illusion has a very convenient side for employers: in the surveys by Kahneman, Knetsch and Thaler, cutting wages 7% with zero inflation seemed outrageous, while raising them 5% under 12% inflation seemed acceptable. The real loss is identical: 7%.
That's why a 2% raise with 5% inflation gets toasted, while a 1% pay cut would send people into the street. The number on your payslip is just a number. What you can buy with it is your real salary.