Comments (0)

By jamie, September 30, 2011 2:57 pm

In recent years, I have been fascinated by some of the research being published social economics. I like the idea that some economists are interested in more than just capitalism and “the bottom line” (caveat – I have never taken an economics class, and I might be somewhat ignorant as to what most general economists write about), so when I heard about this book, I was excited to read it. The authors, Paula Szuchman and Jenny Anderson, are journalists rather that economists, so I figured the economics portions of the book would be just technical enough to teach me something without losing me.

There is some risk in thinking you can learn a great deal about marriage by reading a book – just as our children socialize us to be parents, our spouses socialize us to be marital partners (for better or worse). That said, it is always valuable to hear different perspectives, and this book is full of information and examples from other married couples. I actually finished the book over a month ago, and I still find myself referring back to specific concepts that can hopefully help us achieve (maintain?) marital bliss.

To research this book the authors conducted a huge survey, where they surveyed and then interviewed hundreds of people all over the United States, asking them detailed and personal questions about their marriages. Throughout the book, we are presented with case studies taken from these interviews; sometimes informative, and other times uncomfortably voyeuristic, these vignettes certainly keep the book lively despite its grounding in economics.

Particularly for those who think that marriage is a one-time deal, and that making someone part of your family means that you are intimately attached to them for life or longer, it might be challenging to think about marriage as an economic partnership. We might think of our marriages as “too big to fail” much the way some gigantic corporations do (some think this even as they are about to crash horribly, taking employees and shareholders down with them – some do not recover from these often avoidable catastrophes). Even if we think there is a zero percent chance that our marriages will end badly, it is definitely worth it to do what we can to make our spouse’s lives (and, by extension, our own) as happy as we possibly can.

I actually finished reading this book over a month ago, and I can say that it has made me rethink some of my habits and decisions. Housework still gets away from me at times, and I’m pretty sure GB would be happier if I spent more time on the treadmill and less time shopping (the book talks about both of these issues). And I want for him to be happy, and proud to have me for a wife (please don’t take that in a sexist way – in an ideal world we should all be proud of our spouses, no?). As I write this, I rededicate myself to doing my part to make my home a happy place to be.

GB generously agreed to read this book with me and blog about it from his perspective. He did a great job on the one post he wrote, which was a big deal, considering he is not too keen on sharing his life in this way with the entire world (even though it’s a pretty small world mostly consisting of our parents and friends). Now that I’m finished with the book, I will hand it back to him to use as he sees fit. This might mean you will read more about it here, or not. I told him not to feel obligated – putting oneself “out there” in a blog, even one with a very small readership, can be an uncomfortable experience for many of us (and is hardly the way to make my husband happier if he is only doing it because I asked him to).

Most of my criticisms about the book are not worth mentioning, with two notable exceptions. The first one is about sex. It’s unsurprising that a book about marriage would include mention of this topic, but these authors managed to overdo it. Not only did they devote an entire chapter to sex (the title was “Supply and Demand” – haha), they found as many opportunities as possible to turn the discussion in this direction. Most of the time it seemed as though they were trying to be funny – they did not succeed. Some of their quips actually made me feel embarrassed for them.

My other major annoyance is that the authors made it plainly obvious (and I’m sure this was unintentional) that the book was written for middle- to upper-middle class people. They did not really cover marriages of people who are so stressed out with trying to put food on the table that they probably do not have the luxury to complain about their less-than-perfect spouse. They also managed to include an unfunny joke about gentrification and several examples of “free spirits” (read “freeloaders”), all of which I found to be appalling.

Despite these missteps, I am not one to throw the baby out with the bathwater, so I recommend this book to anyone who wants to improve their relationship with their spouse or significant other. You might learn a few things about economics which may help you better understand some of the shenanigans major corporations engage in these days (given my lack of education in economics, I cannot vouch for their accuracy in this area, but you can probably learn enough economic theory to get you through a dinner party, at least). The book will also give you plenty to think about that can help improve your marriage or relationship, or keep it humming smoothly if you are already (or still) in a state of happy marital bliss (and you will learn about how these things can be cyclical – not unlike housing bubbles, so you don’t freak out when it’s not all roses and sunshine as time goes on).

Scroll down for other posts about Spousonomics:

Review
Part 1: Spousonomics, by Paula Szuchman and Jenny Anderson
Part 2: Yoga and Over-Cooked Chicken
Part 3: Unpacking my Suitcases
Part 4: Don’t Lecture Me
Part 5: Games and Bubbles
GB Part 1: Post-privacy and Marriage

Comments (0)

By jamie, August 24, 2011 2:59 pm

What would you do if you and a friend both got arrested for a crime? Imagine that you are both guilty (I know it’s a stretch) and that the cops put you both in separate rooms for interrogation. They offer you a deal – freedom – if you rat out your friend. What do you do? Game theory says that your very best bet is to be the only rat – then you go free and your friend gets the clink. If you both snitch the time will be longer for both, so your second best bet (and the most beneficial choice for the two of you together) is to keep your mouth shut and each take a smaller punishment. If this reminds you of A Beautiful Mind, it should – this part of game theory comes to us courtesy of John Nash. (The book was just as good as the movie, by the way.)

I finished the book (chapters 9-10). The final chapter takes different aspects of game theory and applies them to marriage. Basically, you should use some strategy in marriage, not to necessarily to manipulate, but to make things better for the both of you. One of the couples in interviewed in this section got the other one to attend the ballet and all sorts of other outings by buying the tickets without asking – I’m not sure that would go well in my household.

This section also talks about “bubbles” – you know, like the housing bubble, tech bubble, etc. In a marriage, these are times where you think your marriage is so perfect that it can’t possibly fail, and everything you experience seems to support your belief. Inevitably the bubble will burst, and it’s up to each of you to decide what to do next.

One day when we were newlyweds, GB and I got haircuts at the same salon. His name was called first, and he leaned over and kissed me as he rose to take his turn. A woman who was also waiting for a haircut made a very big deal about this – she wanted to know how long we had been together and wished us luck that it would always be this way. I guess we were in a bubble at that time because today we sometimes even leave the house without kissing one other, let alone engaging in public displays of affection. I think we’re turning that around though.

It shouldn’t come as any surprise that things can be tough for awhile after the bubble bursts. Just like before, when everything you see and do supports what you already believe, when you’re mad at someone, everything they do justifies your anger (even if it takes a bit of mental gymnastics to make it so). And if you aren’t mad, but just less enthusiastic about those little quirks that used to be so cute in the bubble, it can be really tough to stay focused on the things that you still love about your partner.

The authors provide a quiz for you and your partner to take at regular intervals to help you determine whether you are neutral, recovering from a burst, or just about to pop. I think this is pretty useful information.

Scroll down for other posts about Spousonomics:

Review
Part 1: Spousonomics, by Paula Szuchman and Jenny Anderson
Part 2: Yoga and Over-Cooked Chicken
Part 3: Unpacking my Suitcases
Part 4: Don’t Lecture Me
Part 5: Games and Bubbles
GB Part 1: Post-privacy and Marriage

Comments (0)

By jamie, August 2, 2011 4:50 pm

You should only buy used cars from dealerships, because they can “certify” the value of the car better than an independent seller would. See Honey, the book agrees with me. Although they also said (if I understood correctly), that according to the rules of economics no one would ever want to sell a car unless something is wrong with it. That doesn’t sound right – people upgrade cars all the time even when it isn’t necessary. (Not me – I drive my cars until they flat out refuse to run anymore).

I read chapters 7 and 8, and in case I haven’t already said this, the field of human economics really fascinates me.

The main lesson or chapter 7 can be summed up in three words: communicate, communicate, communicate. Since these economics terms are so much fun, here are a couple of bonus ones:

Pooling equilibrium – Your spouse cannot read your mind. Basically, if you act happy when you are actually furious, go figure – he’ll have no idea that he’s in trouble.

Separating equilibrium – give enough information so your spouse knows what you want him to know

BUT, when you are doing all of this communicating, be sure not to lecture. If you flood your spouse with information, the high information processing costs will hinder his ability to listen and digest what his is hearing. In other words, if someone lectures you, your brain kind of shuts down and all you hear is noise. Then, when the other person expresses annoyance with you weeks later – I TOLD you this already – you have no idea what he is talking about. The authors call this a “conversation coma” which I doubt they took from economics.

As a teacher I see this in my students, and I see it in my daughter too. At some point in my lengthy explanation, their eyes kind of cloud over and they look uncomfortable and inattentive. This is a main reason why I hardly ever lecture when I teach – if you keep things interactive, the students are far more likely to enjoy themselves – they are also more likely to remember the conversation. (Sometimes they quote our discussions on their papers and exams – I love that.)

Another term: intertemporal choice – Every day we are faced with choices that will give us small rewards today or greater rewards tomorrow. (they use a treadmill as an example) We often go for the instant gratification because it’s easy to invent reasons why the delayed reward isn’t so great after all. Remember the marshmallow experiment? A lot of kids didn’t even blink about taking one marshmallow now instead of two treats later – the one on the table looked too tasty to wait for what they couldn’t see. I am a night owl – it’s hard for me to choose in favor of going to sleep early – I get so much done when everyone else is asleep (I blog!), and sometimes I’m at my most creative after midnight. But then I have to get up in the morning. Getting up early would be far easier if I would fall asleep a little earlier (and I understand weight loss would be easier too).

One more thing. The authors recommend the use of commitment devices, or special incentives to help keep one another accountable. I am completely convinced that we shouldn’t bribe our kids with stickers. That said, what if we just aren’t intrinsically motivated to do something? I might have to start posting stickers on my calendar (again) every time I exercise.

Scroll down for other posts about Spousonomics:

Review
Part 1: Spousonomics, by Paula Szuchman and Jenny Anderson
Part 2: Yoga and Over-Cooked Chicken
Part 3: Unpacking my Suitcases
Part 4: Don’t Lecture Me
Part 5: Games and Bubbles
GB Part 1: Post-privacy and Marriage

Comments (0)

By jamie, July 19, 2011 6:44 pm

We have been back from California for almost a week and I still have not finished unpacking. This happens every time we get back from a trip – putting laundry away is pretty much my least favorite chore, but unpacking is far worse. Between two of the books I read today (Chapters 5-6 in this one, along with Unlimited, by Jillian Michaels), I think I figured out why:

I have mentioned here (probably many times) that my family lives clear across the country from me. I moved to Florida to be with my husband. This was a huge sacrifice, because I am very close to my family, but it was one I was willing to make because I love my husband too and I wanted for us to be “us” – his business was/is well-established and I wanted to go back to school, so it made more sense for me to be the one to move. Fast forward to today and I still love him a lot and we are both crazy about our daughter (in case you hadn’t noticed). The thing is, not a day goes by that I don’t miss my family in California. And even though I am happy here, I sometimes look at how Geek Boy can just call up his brother and meet for lunch on a whim or how his parents get to pick Little Mama up from school and meet her teachers, and I feel JUST A LITTLE BIT like I got the short end of the stick here. And unpacking reminds me of that, it symbolizes the fact that I have to go through a big production every time I want to have lunch with my sister, or give my parents and grandparents some time with our little girl.

So, chapters 5 and 6 are about incentives and trade-offs (don’t worry – I’ll get back to my travel/unpacking epiphany in a bitt).

The chapter on incentives includes a fascinating story about a rat outbreak in colonial Vietnam. According to the authors, the French offered payment for rat tails in order to eradicate the problem. Obviously, this incentive backfired – people started breeding rats/rat tails, and the problem just got worse. (Off topic here, but I think parents should think about this story before giving their kids candy as part of potty training or to help them behave – it teaches them to demand prizes for things they should be doing anyway).

As for marriage, the authors find “trust” to be a most powerful incentive: “Trust someone to do the right thing, and odds are, if they aren’t psychopaths or serial killers, they’ll do it.” I looked at the suitcase parked at the foot of the bed today and thought – how long should you wait? I mean, I know I’m not a serial killer, and I’m 99.999% certain I’m not a psychopath, but when I’m busy not unpacking my suitcase I’m not exactly busy doing anything else around the house either, and that’s got to get old after about a day or so. (Tomorrow for sure – laundry will get done and I’ll even clean the kitchen – trust me GB).

I want to keep seeing my family with the frequency I do. My week of wallowing upon my return is not exactly creating an incentive for GB to want me to take these trips (which makes me pretty mad – how dare he not want me to see my family, right?). If I step outside of myself (admittedly I have to step pretty far) I can almost see that my attitude creates a situation where he feels like he’s getting the short end of stick a bit. Also, I know he misses us – Little Mama is pretty great, and I’m not too bad either.

The chapter on trade-offs really got me thinking – I chose to move here even though it would mean that it would be expensive and tricky to spend an appreciable amount of time with my family back home. I also really, really want my kids to be as close to my parents and I am to my grandparents (I don’t call my grandma my Reyna for nothing!) – there will definitely be some trade-offs in order for that to happen. My husband chose to marry someone who is very close to a family that lives almost as far away as they possibly can and still live in the same county (not including Hawaii and Alaska).

Here is an economics term: inequity aversion – as close as I can tell, it means that no one wants to have the short end of the stick. Their advice? “Not exactly a high-concept solution, but the only way to tackle inequality aversion is to will it away- to recognize that the more time you spend on an it’s-not-fair mentality, the less time you have for calculating the long-term benefits of a trade-off, for tallying up the short-term costs, and, ultimately, for finding solutions.”

Scroll down for other posts about Spousonomics:

Review
Part 1: Spousonomics, by Paula Szuchman and Jenny Anderson
Part 2: Yoga and Over-Cooked Chicken
Part 3: Unpacking my Suitcases
Part 4: Don’t Lecture Me
Part 5: Games and Bubbles
GB Part 1: Post-privacy and Marriage

Comments (0)

By jamie, June 21, 2011 10:34 pm

Do you love When Harry Met Sally as much as I do? Harry and Sally’s best friends (Marie and Jess) get married, and there is a scene where Marie expresses her relief that she no longer has to date anymore. “Promise me I’ll never how to go out there again,” she tells Jess, and he promises.

I read chapters 3-4. You are on your own for chapter 3. Chapter 4 is about moral hazard, when we engage in hazardous behavior because we have no incentive to behave. The authors connect this concept with the current health insurance situation in the United States, providing an extra bonus reason for reading. Basically, marriage is kind of like an insurance policy against having to date and find a partner – you won that race already, you earned the ticket to marital bliss. Of course the insurance is important, because we should feel comfortable with our spouse (otherwise we might be constantly paranoid that our marriage is kaput the minute we do something to annoy him/her). The trouble is that, after awhile, we might start to take our partner for granted, which is hazardous to marital bliss – the book gives examples like letting your physical appearance fall by the wayside and leaving the other person to do all the work with the kids, etc.

Here are a couple of ways to combat moral hazard in a marriage:

1. Turn spouses into investors.

Both parties have to feel invested, both should find ways to work together as co-CEOs of the family. For starters (and I am going “off book” here) I think this means that one person cannot have all the power; each one needs to call some of the shots, and each one needs to do some of the work. I am saying this because I know that too many girls are still being advised to do such things as exchange their favorite hobbies in favor of his at the dating stage of a relationship. If your investment is giving up everything you like for the other person, what happens to you? Or what happens when you get married and decide that you actually hate football or whatever? I think a lot of us are guilty of this in varying degrees – I will admit to a single example: I like my meat extremely well-done, and when I used to cook meat I would ask my husband to check it early to make sure it was done to his liking (I still do this part) and then I would grit my teeth and choke down what was, to me, half raw food so that he would be happy with his dinner. Now he is in charge of cooking steaks, and if I see the tiniest pink spot in my serving – back to the grill it goes. And he eats overcooked chicken more than he probably ever has (too bad he doesn’t like gravy…).

I also think this ties well with the division of labor discussion from before – each party should have their “duties” that they are in charge of, but that doesn’t mean you throw your clothing on the floor if she is in charge of the laundry (not a personal example). Also, if I am the dinner specialist, I think it is reasonable for me to assign dinner duty to Geek Boy from time to time. He is the outside specialist, and he has assigned me various duties in this realm. Responsibility for raising kids falls to both parents, regardless of other workload.

2. Regulation – set limits on what the other party can get away with.

The authors actually suggest making a list – I’m not sure about that… It is kind of interesting to think about though – a pessimistic person might think of marriage with written regulations as a state of mutually assured destruction (as opposed to mutual respect) – if I break a rule then he gets to break one too and we are both unhappy (or worse). For me, this doesn’t sound like a positive way to motivate away moral hazard.

3. Create the right incentives.

The economic concept here is that people act more responsibly if you charge them for your insurance. This basically means that instead of getting comfortable in the belief that he/she will love you regardless of what you do or don’t do, it’s better to recognize what your spouse has invested and try to return the favor.

The authors are clear that it’s really easy to fall into the moral hazard trap, so it’s likely that most of us are at least a little bit guilty, so now you have something to think about before you drop out of your Bikram yoga class (guilty!) or whatever morally hazardous behavior you are engaging in.

Next time: Chapter 5 (Incentives) and Chapter 6 (Trade-Offs).

Scroll down for other posts about Spousonomics:

Review
Part 1: Spousonomics, by Paula Szuchman and Jenny Anderson
Part 2: Yoga and Over-Cooked Chicken
Part 3: Unpacking my Suitcases
Part 4: Don’t Lecture Me
Part 5: Games and Bubbles
GB Part 1: Post-privacy and Marriage