Holy mole
It's true
economics.sas.upenn.edu/people/rafael-robb
here is the correct link
https://economics.sas.upenn.edu/node/419
he was sued for $124 million back in 2006? how come a game theorist can be that wealthy?
please explain in great detailHe is worth even more than that. People from Israel in the US are usually wealthy.
The amount asked for in the suit was based on the damages he caused by killing his wife.
His net worth was much lower than that amount. As I recall, the value of his retirement accounts, his stocks and his house were ~$5 million. To settle the suit, he agreed to give 75% of it to his wife's heirs (basically, their daughter).
A perennial discussion topic is whether Robb, if he’d want to (though I expect he is quite content to just retire) should be rehired by his old department or by some other economics department, and whether he should be a journal editor, or even a referee.
I say yes. I would have hanged him for the murder, myself, but given that people in America are going to be soft on crime, I see no reason not to use his talents in the service of the economy and the world of scholarship. He did not embezzle, or molest students, or plagiarize, or make up data. His offense, while extreme, was entirely personal. I would not let him marry my daughter, but I would let him edit my journal. It makes no sense at all, I think, to say that the best social policy is to put a price of just 10 years of his time for beating his wife to death but then add that someone like him should never be allowed to work again. It’s typical liberal thinking: pretend to be merciful and compassionate, but then be vindictive in the extreme and make sure the person’s life is totally ruined forever, even at society’s expense.
A perennial discussion topic is whether Robb, if he’d want to (though I expect he is quite content to just retire) should be rehired by his old department or by some other economics department, and whether he should be a journal editor, or even a referee.
I say yes. I would have hanged him for the murder, myself, but given that people in America are going to be soft on crime, I see no reason not to use his talents in the service of the economy and the world of scholarship. He did not embezzle, or molest students, or plagiarize, or make up data. His offense, while extreme, was entirely personal. I would not let him marry my daughter, but I would let him edit my journal. It makes no sense at all, I think, to say that the best social policy is to put a price of just 10 years of his time for beating his wife to death but then add that someone like him should never be allowed to work again. It’s typical liberal thinking: pretend to be merciful and compassionate, but then be vindictive in the extreme and make sure the person’s life is totally ruined forever, even at society’s expense.
^ER's blog