What is Big Think?  

We are Big Idea Hunters…

We live in a time of information abundance, which far too many of us see as information overload. With the sum total of human knowledge, past and present, at our fingertips, we’re faced with a crisis of attention: which ideas should we engage with, and why? Big Think is an evolving roadmap to the best thinking on the planet — the ideas that can help you think flexibly and act decisively in a multivariate world.

A word about Big Ideas and Themes — The architecture of Big Think

Big ideas are lenses for envisioning the future. Every article and video on bigthink.com and on our learning platforms is based on an emerging “big idea” that is significant, widely relevant, and actionable. We’re sifting the noise for the questions and insights that have the power to change all of our lives, for decades to come. For example, reverse-engineering is a big idea in that the concept is increasingly useful across multiple disciplines, from education to nanotechnology.

Themes are the seven broad umbrellas under which we organize the hundreds of big ideas that populate Big Think. They include New World Order, Earth and Beyond, 21st Century Living, Going Mental, Extreme Biology, Power and Influence, and Inventing the Future.

Big Think Features:

12,000+ Expert Videos

1

Browse videos featuring experts across a wide range of disciplines, from personal health to business leadership to neuroscience.

Watch videos

World Renowned Bloggers

2

Big Think’s contributors offer expert analysis of the big ideas behind the news.

Go to blogs

Big Think Edge

3

Big Think’s Edge learning platform for career mentorship and professional development provides engaging and actionable courses delivered by the people who are shaping our future.

Find out more
Close

Why We Marry

July 17, 2012, 9:48 AM
Shutterstock_82238365

Here’s a question I have been struggling for years: Why do we marry? I am not confused about the desire to have a wedding – the pretty dress, standing before family and friends, the party – that part I get.  It’s the need to seek the government seal of approval of the marriage that challenges me.

New economic research comes up with a tidy theoretical argument for why we marry, but if you ask me the question the paper really answers is, “Why did our parents marry?”

The economic argument goes something like this. Marriage is efficient in the economic sense only when both people in the union can specialize in the area of production in which they have a comparative advantage. If person A earns more than person B, and A and B have children together then A should work outside the home and B should put her career aside to take care of children.

If, for some reason, B doesn’t want to spend years of her/ his life wiping runny noses and instead stays in the workforce, then the marriage is technically inefficient in that A and B are not maximizing the potential gains from the trade.

Inefficiency is bad. So in order to encourage the efficient allocation of household resources, A needs to promise B future compensation for the time he/she spends taking care of the family instead of earning an income.

Promises are nice, but contracts are better.

People marry because it makes that commitment to compensate the caregiver credible and, as a result, encourages marriages to be efficient in a way that a non-marital arrangements never could be.

We marry, according to this argument, because that is the arrangement that encourages the most efficient allocation of household resources.

This would have been a very convincing story thirty years ago and, in fact, I am not sure this is really any different than the explanation for marriage given by Gary Becker in his famous Treatise on the Family (published in 1981).

But the world has changed.

According to a recent poll by the Pew Center for Research, fewer Americans than ever before feel the institution of marriage is still relevant. Interestingly, 47% of the unmarried adults in that survey who felt that marriage was obsolete also expressed hope that one day they would be married themselves. Likewise, many already married adults--31 percent--expressed the opinion that marriage is no longer relevant.

I think the source of this apparent contradiction – that people want to be married but really don’t see the point – is that household production is no longer maximized when one person sacrifices their career to care for the family.

For many couples with children the best arrangement is for both to work on the waged labor market and then to use the income that labor generates to purchase all of the goods and services formally produced by women in the home.

Why do we still marry, despite the fact that the legal framework is no longer needed to ensure the efficient allocation of household resources?

I think Justin Wolfers and Betsy Stevenson said it best a few weeks ago in their “Economic Case for Same Sex Marriage”:

Viewed through an economic frame, modern partnerships are based upon “consumption complementarities” -- the joy of sharing things and experiences -- rather than the production-based gains that motivated traditional marriage.

That is certainly why I would like to be married. I am sure that others agree.

References:

Cigno, Alessandro (2012). “Marriage as a commitment device.” Review of Economics of the Household Vol. 10: pp 193–213

 

Why We Marry

Newsletter: Share: