Center for Business and Economic Research - Ball State University


CBER Data Center
Projects and PublicationsEconomic IndicatorsWeekly CommentaryCommunity Asset InventoryManufacturing Scorecard

About

Commentaries are published weekly and distributed through the Indianapolis Business Journal and many other print and online publications. Disclaimer

RSS Feed

Disclaimer

The views expressed in these commentaries do not reflect those of Ball State University or the Center for Business and Economic Research.

Recent

Inflation Is a Policy and Political ProblemWe should all be humble in our criticism of the federal government in causing inflation.

The Lives of Mothers Through the Last CenturyThe women of the 20th century witnessed the most stunning technological and economic growth.

Lilly CEO Speaks to Indiana’s FutureIndiana must better educate a higher share of its young adults and make more communities into places they’d like to live.

Ending Hospital Monopolies Is Needed to Restore Free MarketsThe economic argument against monopoly power is that it interferes with the free functioning of markets.

View archives

Top Tags

jobs and employment 216
economics 168
education 134
economic development 131
taxes 120
finance 104
recession 96
state and local government 95
budget and spending 87
unemployment and the labor market 84
Browse all tags
Reporter / Admin Login

June 18, 2012

Fathers and Personal Discount Rate

Simple solutions to complex problems are seldom useful, but it is an irony that fairly elementary explanations often hold the key to complex economic outcomes. For example, inflation is solely caused by an excess supply of money, and economic growth can only occur through greater efficiencies. But drawing easy prescriptions from these truths is frustrating.

One example is that economic outcomes for individuals are largely determined by the rate at which they discount the future. More simply, the world appears to treat more kindly those who value the future more highly than the present. It has ever been thus.

As a thought experiment, suppose we have two teenage girls of equal talent and opportunity. Both have dreams and hopes for the future along with immediate interests in those things teenage girls seem to like. This is normal fare, that our abundant society encourages, and it is a delight to watch (but not necessarily listen). Now we cannot know directly how much each girl values the future. We can only rely on observation of their actions, or what economists refer to as their 'revealed preference.'­ That is, by watching what they do.

The girl who values the future more highly will defer some current pleasures to do things that improve her future prospects. She will study more, take harder classes and participate in sports and social activities that ready her for a future as an adult. The girl who cares relatively more about the present than the future will discomfit herself less in the short run for a long run gain which she values less. Of course how much the future matters changes with time, experience and how much you love people who might be living in the future when you are not. ­

A long history of morality has developed across cultures to encourage a lessened discounting of the future. One reasonable explanation for this is that it is quite easy to do things when young and inexperienced that severely limit one’s long run options.

The distinction between the girl that values the future greatly and the one who does not is more than just a tautological exercise. If you were to loan money to these girls, to whom would you assign more risk and thus a higher interest rate?­ A synonym for an interest rate is a discount rate, and so it comes full circle. The more you value the future, the more highly you are apt to be valued by the economy, and vice versa. It is worth noting that all these valuations are fair, just not equal. Only a child thinks ‘equal’ and ‘fair’ are the same thing.

The policy press prescription for all this remains vexing of course. Some of the best new research on poverty suggests that the absence of hope (or low future valuation) perversely reinforces behaviors that ensure a less hopeful future. This research is still new, but if true suggests we re-explore some fairly antediluvian instructions for growing up. And that is what fathers are for.

Link to this commentary: https://commentaries.cberdata.org/628/fathers-and-personal-discount-rate

Tags: value, family and households


About the Author

Michael Hicks cberdirector@bsu.edu

Michael J. Hicks, PhD, is the director of the Center for Business and Economic Research and the George and Frances Ball distinguished professor of economics in the Miller College of Business at Ball State University. Hicks earned doctoral and master’s degrees in economics from the University of Tennessee and a bachelor’s degree in economics from Virginia Military Institute. He has authored two books and more than 60 scholarly works focusing on state and local public policy, including tax and expenditure policy and the impact of Wal-Mart on local economies.

© Center for Business and Economic Research, Ball State University

About Ball State CBER Data Center

Ball State CBER Data Center is one-stop shop for economic data including demographics, education, health, and social capital. Our easy-to-use, visual web tools offer data collection and analysis for grant writers, economic developers, policy makers, and the general public.

Ball State CBER Data Center (cberdata.org) is a product of the Center for Business and Economic Research at Ball State University. CBER's mission is to conduct relevant and timely public policy research on a wide range of economic issues affecting the state and nation. Learn more.

Terms of Service

Center for Business and Economic Research

Ball State University • Whitinger Business Building, room 149
2000 W. University Ave.
Muncie, IN 47306-0360
Phone:
765-285-5926
Email:
cber@bsu.edu
Website:
www.bsu.edu/cber
Facebook:
www.facebook.com/BallStateCBER
Twitter:
www.twitter.com/BallStateCBER
Close