A couple of posts this week have concerned choices over drug and alchohol consumption. A recent academic paper discusses the motivation for intoxication. Here is the abstract:
It is argued that drug consumption, most commonly alcohol drinking, can be a technology to give up some control over one’s actions and words. It can be employed by trustworthy players to reveal their type. Similarly alcohol can function as a “social lubricant” and faciliate type revelation in conversations. It is shown that both separating and pooling equilibria can exist; as opposed to the classic results in the literature, a pooling equilibrium is still informative. Drugs which allow a gradual loss of control by appropriate doses and for which moderate consumption is not addictive are particularly suitable because the consumption can be easily observed and reciprocated and is unlikely to occur out of the social context. There is a trade-off between the efficiency gains due to the signaling effect and the loss of productivity associated with intoxication. Long run evolutionary equilibria of the type distribution are considered. If coordination on an exclusive technology is efficient, social norms or laws can raise efficiency by legalizing only one drug.
I'm so proud to be an economist. :)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I find this topic interesting. We recently read an article in my psychology class talking about drinking/intoxication and peoples' motivation for it. A vast majority of the time, people do drink to "give up some control ovver their actions and words" or to have an excuse for acting or saying something that would normally be seen as socially unacceptable or frowned upon.
ReplyDeleteI don't exactly understand the last sentence, but I think it's saying that if something such as marijuana is being used efficiently, with "appropriate doses and moderate consumption," its efficiency and help to people could be raised by its legalization. If it's legal, people will begin using it to help themselves (by using moderate, regaulated amounts)rather than possibly shying away from it becasue of its illegality.
A
This article is a bit complicated. I had to reread it to get some understanding of what its saying. It is true. People do face a tradeoff between getting the most they can from alcohol or choosing an alternative of being less productive. But as principle 3 states: rational people think at the margin, most drug abusers will make the decision based on the context, environment,and how they are feeling. Based on their situation, they will decide which has the lowest opportunity cost (temporarily feeling free and happy because of intoxification or remaining sober and being productive.)
ReplyDeleteI was confused by a lot of the technical jargo. I guess we will still have a lot of vocabulary to learn.
ReplyDeleteE
This article shows that nearly all activities in life have trade-offs. Whether we think about it or not we make choices all the time between opportunities that are availiable to us. Sometimes, like the case of drinking given in the article, there are both positive and negative aspects of choosing both sides, which could make the choice difficult.
ReplyDeleteThis article was a little confusing to me but i think it really dependson on principle 3 as mysha said. I have a big problem with principle 3 because it completely negates human emotion an thought. It's true that we should make the most rational land logical decision but we rarely do. Drinking may have the advantages if used correctly, but it is rarely used that way. It can be addicting to some and it is often overused. (E)
ReplyDeleteI agree with Preston. This article is interesting based on the idea of trade offs. Furthermore the argument can be said in terms of alcohol related to the economy that it is one of the few recession proof stocks. An example would be Anheuser Busch, whose stock has remained relatively consistent even through past recessions and now. Although the stock price dropped in late 2008, their was a strong rise before it showing equilibrium. It shows that in good times people drink, and in bad times they do as well.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.google.com/finance?client=ob&q=NYSE:BUD
I agree with Caleb.
ReplyDelete"Long run evolutionary equilibria of the type distribution are considered."
.....what?
Nonetheless, its an interesting topic.