Friday, March 27, 2009

More answers for Akst

Bryan Caplan, who is authoring a book that I have termed, "The Real Parentonomics," provides an answer to this question from Daniel Akst at the end of his WSJ review of Parentonomics.
It's a pity that Mr. Gans misses the chance to cover the most interesting question an economist might address in the parenting arena: Why he decided to have children in the first place? They're no longer an economic asset, after all. So is human reproduction nowadays irrational? Is it even ethical? If a pill is invented that would confer the joys of parenthood without all the mess or expense, should people take it? Dreary speculation, I know, but what better topic for the dismal science?
Bryan's answer to (i) is because we like them. The rest follows. Read on.

No comments:

Post a Comment