Saturday May 17 2008
All times are London time

Search Quotes in the FT.com site
FT Logo

May 3, 2008

Dear Economist: Did I make a mistake in being such a square as a teenager?

Dear Economist,
I am 22 years old with a younger sister. My parents were pretty strict, so I made sure I was a sensible teenager. I didn’t sleep around, didn’t take drugs, never seriously smoked and went on to a good graduate job. But now my 17-year-old sister is getting away with murder: my parents know she smokes, let her boyfriends stay overnight and turn a blind eye to other misdemeanours. It’s just not fair. Did I make a mistake in being such a square as a teenager?
Georgie H, Hertfordshire

Dear Georgie,

The latest Economic Journal presents a simple game-theory model of the problem. All teenagers wish to misbehave but fear parental sanctions. Parents wish to threaten punishment for transgressions, but only some parents are strict enough to do so. Your younger sister’s mere existence skewed the game to your disadvantage. Your parents are evidently soft-hearted, but had a clear incentive to pretend to be strict because every time they punished you, they knew they were also deterring your sister.

Now that you have flown the nest, the gains from “acting strict” are much smaller and discipline has slipped. Your sister pushed and discovered that they did not push back; you would not have found it so easy. But sunk costs are sunk costs, so be content with your graduate job. And if you really want to take drugs and sleep around, I can assure you it is not too late.

Questions to economist@ft.com

3 Responses to “Dear Economist: Did I make a mistake in being such a square as a teenager?”

Comments

  1. Seems Georgie’s parents are suffering from the time inconsistency problem. I wonder why Georgie didn’t test his parents (as most children try to do) to the extent that he could determine whether he can get away with things. Perhaps he was content being a good kid.

    Posted by: Jesse Zinn | May 4th, 2008 at 7:42 pm | Report this comment
  2. I can almost see this situation appearing in my microeconomics paper next week. If so, I owe you a drink Mr Harford!

    Posted by: jimbo | May 4th, 2008 at 11:40 pm | Report this comment
  3. […] no problem being a naughty teenager; why? The answer is game theory, according to the Undercover Economist. And for all of you who were square like myself; there’s no point regretting it […]

    Posted by: To all you naughty teenagers out there… « Josefin Malmqvist | May 5th, 2008 at 1:51 am | Report this comment

Post a comment

Comment Policy




As a final step before posting the comment, please type the two words you see in the image beloweight numbers in the audio clip; this test is to prevent automated robots from posting comments.


More FT Blogs and Forums

  • Economists' Forum Leading economists and the FT's chief economics commentator, Martin Wolf, debate the big issues

  • Willem Buiter's Maverecon The LSE professor blogs on 'economics, politics, ethics, religion, culture, free and open source software (FOSS), and whatever'

  • Clive Crook's blog The FT's chief Washington commentator blogs about intersection of politics and economics

  • John Gapper's blog FT chief business commentator talks about business, finance, media and technology

  • Gideon Rachman's blog The FT's chief foreign affairs commentator on world issues and his travels

  • Management Blog A forum for the latest thinking about the issues that preoccupy managers around the world

  • FT Alphaville Instant market news and commentary for finance professionals

  • Brussels Blog By our Brussels writers

  • Westminster Blog By our UK Parliament writers

  • Dear Lucy Columnist Lucy Kellaway and readers solve your workplace woes

  • FT Tech Blog Our San Francisco and world correspondents look at the intersection of technology and business