Wow. Just.. Wow.
http://www.forbes.com/2006/02/11/eco...rtner=netscape
It's interesting how marriage was modeled as a profit venture.
Quote:
Economists have been equating money and marriage ever since Nobel Prize-winning economist Gary Becker published his seminal paper "A Theory of Marriage" in two parts in 1973 and 1974--also, not coincidentally, in the Journal of Political Economy.
Becker used market analysis to tackle the questions of whom, when and why we marry. His conclusions? Mate selection is a market, and marriages occur only if they are profitable for both parties involved.
|
The difference between wives and whores? Babies (and domestic chores lol).
Quote:
Wives, in truth, are superior to whores in the economist's sense of being a good whose consumption increases as income rises--like fine wine. This may explain why prostitution is less common in wealthier countries. But the implication remains that wives and whores are--if not exactly like Coke and Pepsi--something akin to champagne and beer. The same sort of thing.
As with Becker, a key differentiator in Edlund and Korn's model is reproductive sex. Wives can offer it, whores can not.
|
Marriage already is quite profitable for women in North America. Perhaps they should to do a meta-analysis. My guess: it will boil down to the male effectively buying his progeny through the expenditure of marriage.
Imagine if the social paradigm shifted where there was virtually a price tag on a wife and the babies she could bear for the man. The dating market might, in some ****ed up Dystopian vision, turn out to be an actual market.
Two Plus Two
Linear Mode
