Skip to main content

"Love vs. economics on Valentine's Day" by Casey Lartigue Jr. (Korea Times)

Uh-oh! Valentine’s Day 2012. What should you get for your sweetheart(s)? Jewelry, dinner, flowers, clothing, candy, and greeting cards are the usual suspects. What’s not on the list?

Cash. Some economists say it is the most efficient gift to give. Think back: How many times have you smiled awkwardly when realizing you were receiving another tie, instead of the Madden NFL video game you would have bought with a cash gift? When giving her lingerie (again), do you add, ``The gift receipt is there, you can return it if you don’t like it.”

In some cases, you and your sweetheart may be exchanging unwanted gifts. Cash then is a better gift because the recipient can buy what he or she wants (giving gold may be the most efficient of all because governments reduce the value of your money with deficit spending).

Let’s say the economists are correct ― do you want to follow their cold calculations on a day meant for lovers? Economists, predictably, say: ``It depends.” In an interview on the site LearnLiberty.org, George Mason University economics professor Chris Coyne argues that a spouse or a long-term mate can get away with giving cash or a gift certificate. But at the start of the relationship, the sender may still need to demonstrate seriousness by sending a thoughtful or expensive gift.

As Coyne explains it in economic lingo, a gift is a ``signal” that the sender gives to the recipient of serious intentions when there is ``asymmetrical information” (that is, one person has more information than another person in an exchange, such as a car salesman and prospective buyer).

Let’s continue assuming that economists like Coyne are correct. Wouldn’t giving cash undercut the boost that Valentine’s Day gives to the economy, as cited favorably by Duke University professor Dan Ariely?

Not so. Giving cash may even make the economy more efficient than gift-giving. Florists love Valentine’s Day ― according to the Society of American Florists, they can make 40 percent of their annual income during February. The National Retail Federation estimates that the average Valentiner in America spent $116.21 on traditional Valentine’s Day merchandise (almost $16 billion) last year.

But economists often refer to the ``substitution effect.” That is, one purchase may be a substitute for another. Derek Thompson of the Atlantic Wire puts it well: ``Valentine’s didn’t create economic activity, it just concentrated it.”

You know February 14 is coming up, so you may hold onto to a gift, skip taking your sweetheart out to a concert in September, or save up so you can nibble on overpriced food at a fancy French restaurant on Valentine’s Day. By giving cash, the recipient is more likely to spend the money well, a better boost for the economy than wasted gifts.

Ryan Swift, host of the popular site swifteconomics.com, goes one step further, even denouncing Christmas and other special gift-giving days as a ``deadweight loss.” He cites Joe Waldfogel of the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton Business School, who estimated in his 2009 book ``Scroogenomics” that Americans spent $66 billion on gifts in 2007, but that recipients only valued them at $54 billion, producing a deadweight loss of $12 billion to the economy.

So if you receive a gift for Valentine’s Day this year, be sure to thank the giver for the deadweight loss that is dragging down the economy. When you hand the person cash or gold in return, be sure to note that you are helping the economy. Even better ― buy a gift for yourself on Valentine’s Day that you really wanted and advise your (perhaps soon-to-be-ex) sweetie to do the same.


Casey Lartigue, Jr., is director for International Relations at the Center for Free Enterprise in Seoul.

This article originally appeared in the Korea Times on February 13, 2012.


Sources for this article:
[7] http://www.amazon.com/Scroogenomics-Why-Shouldnt-Presents-Holidays/dp/0691142645

* I was a guest on TBS eFM 101.3 on Valentine's Day to discuss this article.
* Linked by EFN-Asia

Popular posts from this blog

Does a flower turn to the sun?

I tend not to address points raised by people commenting on posts. In the back-and-forth of such discussions, people sometimes say things they don't mean or take extreme positions. In other cases they are just trying to be provocative, especially when they can remain anonymous. But a discussion on Greg Mankiw's blog caught my attention. That's because a couple of the folks suggested that parents don't really have the knowledge to make decisions about the quality of schools. Between 2002-2004 I was actively involved in the fight to get school vouchers for families in DC. I often heard the argument that parents don't know how to choose between good and bad schools and that, anyway, parents had enough choices with the school system's "out-of-boundary" options and charters (that had also been opposed). Without getting too deep into the out-of-boundary program, I'll point out that Woodrow Wilson HS, considered one of the best schools in the city, recei...

The Casey Lartigue Show

Guests scheduled for May NOTE: Check here for updates on Memorandum 46! Future Shows Thomas Sowell of the Hoover Institution This is my first attempt at putting together my own promo , it was rejected because of the sound quality May 19 edition of the Casey Lartigue Show We had a great show yesterday, probably the best so far. The topic: Malcolm X. The occasion? Anniversary of his 82nd birthday. Eliot Morgan and I had a great time talking with the callers. Deneen Borelli called in on our special guest line. You can download the file here. We posed the question: What did Malcolm X do? We contrasted the viewpoint and legacies of Malcolm X and Thurgood Marshall. The one mistake I made was not to focus on the question that Marshall asked: What was the one concrete thing that Malcolm X did. In segment 3, callers begin to get personal with us. May 12 edition of the Casey Lartigue Show Featured guest: Don Boudreaux of George Mason University Promo for the May 12 show May 5 edition of the C...

Korea Fighting!

Years ago I read an article about a man who kept a detailed diary about his life. I think it was 70 years of diaries. Nothing was too insignificant for him to mention. I remember reading it and wondering, "Yeah, but will anyone ever read those boxes of diaries about him going to the bathroom?" I guess he often wrote about himself writing... These days I'm having the opposite problem... I'm living it up so much that I don't have time to write... Can you really enjoy life and record it all? If I had time I would blog about... * going swing dancing * getting treated at the Kkunnori restaurant in Jamsil by two friends who insist I'm the luckiest man alive because I know them. * then getting treated to an hour or two at the Luxury noraebang near Kkunnori . * the "call" button in Korean restaurants * Koreans ordering too much food whenever they eat together * Meeting with Gong Byeong Ho (공병호) for the first time in 10 years. * how damn energetic Seoul i...

Common Sense on North Korea (Korea Times, April 2, 2012)

By Casey Lartigue, Jr. As interesting as Kookmin University professor Andrei Lankov’s writings are, there is nothing quite like attending one of his lectures. He can barely restrain himself behind the podium, often pointing and waving his arms. I also enjoy his unscripted speeches, but his answers in Q&A sessions are like the difference between watching Michael Jordan shoot baskets in warm-ups and an actual game. I have finally discovered the secret behind Lankov’s consistently solid analysis about North Korea: Use common sense. At an Asan Institute conference last summer, he argued that North Korea watchers should try to understand North Korea from its perspective. Don’t most people know that you must understand the mindset of others you are dealing with? Yet, common sense in theory gets ignored politically. From the North Korean perspective, nuclear weapons are the best thing they’ve got going. They will NOT give them up easily, even if President Obama ...

Double Dog Daring Dellinger

Heller has been heard by the Supreme Court, now the justices will read and re-read briefs, and conference, and supposedly give us some kind of decision in June.  To reiterate my prediction:  Ban overturned, reasonable restrictions allowed, probably "rational" scrutiny of any laws, and no major effect nationally. That said, and setting aside my concerns about the court's treatment of  Miller , as something for another day, I was interested in this bit : In addition to the handgun ban, Washington also has a trigger lock requirement for other guns that raised some concerns Tuesday. "When you hear somebody crawling in your bedroom window, you can run to your gun, unlock it, load it and then fire?" Justice Antonin Scalia said. Roberts, who has two young children, suggested at one point that trigger locks might be reasonable. "There is always a risk that the children will get up and grab the firearm and use it for some purpose other than what the Second Amendme...