Putting Out

“You’re really serious about this Deadweight Loss of Monogamy thing, aren’t you?”

“Well, yeah. It could be huge.  I mean what could possibly be a sexier application of economic theory than sex?”

“Okay…so we have a husband and a wife.  Who’s the monopolist?”

“Let’s say it’s the husband.  He has, like, total market power in the relevant market.”

“Which is?”

“His wife.”

”So…what does he produce?”

”Let’s say that he is in the business of producing Wooing Effort.”

”Wooing effort?”

“Yeah. Because there are no competitors for him in this particular market, he is able to significantly reduce his output while still making the same profits. He is able to ouput less ‘Wooing Effort’ while still getting the same amount of ‘doing it’ from his wife.  There may be, at certain extreme levels, some elasticity in his wife's demand for his services, depending on how many barriers to entry there are, and on whether or not there are a significant number of potential market entrants waiting around.  But, for the most part, the husband is able to underproduce compared to the amount of effort he would generate in a competitive market.  Thus, the Deadweight Loss of Monogamy."

“But wait a second…can’t the wife control price and output just as much as the husband? Instead of being a transaction between a buyer and a seller, isn’t this really just . . . a marriage between two monopolists?”

“Dude. This is Texas. That's not allowed.”

Comments

[Jeff S.]

Love it.

Therefore, the natural grey market that arises when artificial barriers are put into place controlling supply and demand.

[Oklahoma City School of Law 4L]

Does Mrs. AndVodka ever feel kind of like she's married to Howard Stern . . . with fewer naked women and much "geekier" fans?

[Jason Boothe]

Nice, very nice.

I haven't thought it through yet, but maybe this could be analyzed along the lines of a Cournot duopoly.

[Ian]

I still think phrasing it in terms of out-put contracts sounds funnier. And hey that keeps you out of Clayton and in Sherman, where, let's face it, we are all more comfortable.

[Arvind]

the anti-free market and anti-competitive effects of a marriage transaction.

[Lino]

You all get F's. Your failure to see that this is an exclusive dealing contract proves my pedagogical failure. But wait, you say - this is a contract for services? Services are only incidental to the product - babies. The marriage agreement forecloses competitors which restricts both number and genetic diversity of new persons.

[some married guy]

Dude - If you're married, you got to know that her supply has very little, if anything to do with his demand.