November 3rd, 2007
The Economics of Prenuptial Agreements
Welcome to Gauravonomics Blog! Subscribe to my combined feed in a feed reader or by e-mail and you'll never miss a single post. Thanks for visiting!
In two recent posts regarding personal ads on Craigslist, Freakonomics analyzes the economics of gold-digging and sugar-daddying . Basically, if you put together a beautiful 20-something out-of-work actress and a rich 30-something investment banker, marriage makes economic sense for the woman (but not the man) and dating makes economic sense for the man (but not the woman).
What you suggest is a simple trade - you bring your looks to the party, and I bring my money. Fine, simple. But here’s the rub - your looks will fade and my money will likely continue into perpetuity… So, in economic terms, you are a depreciating asset and I am an earning asset… So in Wall Street terms, we would call you a trading position, not a buy and hold … hence the rub … marriage. It doesn’t make good business sense to “buy you” (which is what you’re asking) so I’d rather lease. So a deal that makes sense is dating, not marriage. (link)
Just as a beautiful woman could be described as a “depreciating asset,” so could a rent-free apartment with an unlimited shopping budget. A platinum card may thrill for a few months, but, particularly given the required tradeoff of supplying sexual favors to a man who describes himself as “Danny De Vito with a nicer suit,” it’s also likely to offer diminishing returns… If you’re planning to gold-dig, stick to the “MARRIAGE ONLY” rule. Then, at least, you’ll be entitled to equitable division of the spoils. (link)
You know what works for both — a water-tight pre-nuptial agreement.
