Love Economics 101

September 10, 2007

I was reminded today that I have a blog. (Thanks CP!) Most days I forget, which is rather tragic. Anyway, I figure I should get back to it since I’m now in a job where I have to read a voluminous quantity of diverse stuff and if I don’t write some of my thoughts down, I’ll never remember any of it. 

(Ironically, what I’m about to write has nothing to do with what I’ve been reading for work!  Oh well.)

Anyway, here is more evidence that I best understand relationships using economic metaphors. (Oh dear!) Just last week, I used “loss aversion” (basically that people would rather avoid losses than acquire gains) to explain to a friend why a certain love interest was taking forever to break up with his girlfriend even though their mutual attraction was already out in the open. 

I’ve also often used the concept of “revealed preferences” (basically that the preferences of consumers can be derived from their spending patterns) to try to explain the implications of a disconnect between words and actions. It strikes me as odd that people would rather listen to sweet talk than actually look at the cold, hard facts that if someone treats you like shit, they don’t exactly love you.  Talk is cheap and it makes me want to do a Jerry Macguire and yell, “show me the money!”.

I’m all for the empirical evidence and I’m clearly a heartless bitch when the hypothesis does not hold up against the data. But it turns out that the “rational person” is usually an oxymoron. The heart wants what it wants and there is no logical explanation to it.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: