Principle
We all promise ourselves to be better. Every month we are going to save a small «strategic reserve» for the future. And every morning we plan to eat exactly the norm of fruits, vegetables and whole grains that nutritionists advise. And with all our hearts we wish to keep in decent shape, wear only clean underpants, stop yelling at children because of spilled (once again) milk — just at the moment when you just sat down to your plate — and start to truly nurture and cherish our dearest spouses.
But then our plans collide with reality.
And we clean our bank account to zero, buying unnecessary clothes, put up with another five kilograms of fat folds, yell at children and treat our dearest spouses as eunuch servants, whom fate has placed at our full disposal.
What is our mistake?
In the inability to make a sustainable intertemporal choice.
“Intertemporal choice” is the term economists use to describe decisions we make in the present, but which are very significant for the future. In recent years, intertemporal choice has become the subject of much scientific research, because such decisions affect not only individual individuals, such as you and me, but also the entire state and, most importantly, its budget. Today you fill your stomach with microwaved pizza and pour soda on top of it — and tomorrow you are making your modest contribution to the monstrous cost of US medical care for citizens. Today you decide to wait another year with contributions to the pension fund — and tomorrow, when the time for a well-deserved rest begins, you hope for the support of Uncle Sam. Today you run up thousands of dollars in credit card debt, and tomorrow you are one of about 6400 people who have filed for bankruptcy.
The man who put the concept of intertemporal choice on the map of economics in the early 1796th century was not a professional economist and did not receive prestigious prizes for his discovery. His name was John Ray (1872-XNUMX. — Approx. ed.), and he was a thin Scottish doctor and teacher, wore half-face sideburns and lived out his days in Hawaii. His interests included geology, agriculture, skating and, as with his predecessor Adam Smith, the wealth of nations. He was especially interested in the question of why some peoples grow rich, while others vegetate in poverty.
Ray proclaimed — which is what Scottish teachers tend to do: «declare» — that rich countries get richer in part because their people are more reserved and see the future. They are able to put off pleasure for later.
“The pleasures that are available cause the strongest desire to taste them,” Ray wrote in his 1834 treatise The Sociological Theory of Capital. “Having appeared in the field of vision, the object of desire absorbs all attention, concentrates all aspirations on itself and makes you imagine in all colors the pleasures that it promises this minute.” In other words: do not put off until tomorrow what you can please yourself with today.
Ray was nowhere near the recognition that fell to Adam Smith — in the last years of his life, he was engaged in inoculating against smallpox (this, of course, is also a good deed, but it does not compare with the laurels of the pioneer of economic science). And yet, to the hordes of economists who study intertemporal choice, he has become a truly legendary figure. If Smith proved that states can get rich by saving, then Ray found that states can save only if their inhabitants are able to limit themselves in some way. And you can’t argue with that — everyone who has ever tried to become richer, happier or slimmer at least once in their life knows that the secret of success is restraint.
Why is it so hard for us? There are several reasons for this.
The first is what is now called «hyperbolic discounting». Do not be afraid of incomprehensible terminology. In essence, this means the following: we value the benefits that we can achieve in the future, much less than those that we can receive in the present. Therefore, it is very difficult for us to resist the temptation to enjoy what is offered to us right now, even if we are aware of the unreasonableness of such an act.
Let’s say your friend has $10 in his wallet. Your friend is in awe of them because they are the only $10 he can spend on a bottle of wine or a movie ticket. For him, that $10 is of real value right now. But someone offered him a deal: if he gives away his $10 now, in a few months he will get $20 back. Your friend asks you what to do. You answer that there is nothing to think about — of course, we must agree, this is a XNUMX% profit!
Now imagine that this is your $10 and someone offered you exactly the same deal: give your money today — in the future you will receive twice as much. You can no longer say that «there is nothing to think about.» Give away the money you could use to go to the movies tonight? Well, I do not. Here’s hyperbolic discounting in action: the temptation to use your $10 right now is much stronger than the temptation to get rich later. To wait for the benefits in the future, patience is needed — namely, patience is very often lacking for all of us.
Or take, for example, sports. This is generally a classic case of hyperbolic discounting. Only crazy people manage to get some pleasure from fitness — everyone else makes themselves sweat in the gym just because it benefits. More precisely, because it will probably be useful sometime in the future.
How do we reason in this case? Forcing yourself to climb on the machine is six plus points spent (the price of your time and energy). But the benefits of classes (steel press, titanium biceps) will be equal to eight plus signs. What’s in the dry matter? Two pluses! Everyone, go to the gym!
Wait a second. There is one problem. All these eight pluses are waiting for us somewhere in the very distant, indefinite future, when our muscles will really fill with steel — but we must sacrifice our already existing six pluses right here and now. Do you understand what we are getting at? So, tomorrow’s acquisitions begin to seem less significant to us than today’s expenses — and we begin to convince ourselves that steel muscles are actually worth only four pluses (there is a present value — the value of future cash income, estimated at a point in time prior to their receipt. The amount received in the present usually has a higher value than the same amount received in the future. — Note ed.). So, we get not eight against six, but only four. And it suddenly turns out that as a result of training, we will not gain, but lose two pluses (Table 10). Do we need it? Let’s hit the gym, let’s go party!
Table 10
Well, let’s say that you never sin with hyperbolic discounting. You are a normal person. You understand what is really important. And you know what the real value of playing sports is. That’s why you have an annual gym membership and run miles on the treadmill every day after work. In a day for sure. Well, at least once a week. Although how will it work. So, in short, let’s go.
What about money? You probably don’t make any mistakes here, do you? You know perfectly well that there is nothing to expect favors from fate, and already now you are doing everything possible to guarantee yourself a comfortable old age. You know that you should not rely on the social security system, and whether you will have a comfortable old age depends only on you. You know that condominiums in Sun City (a town in Arizona, the majority of whose population are retirees. — Approx. Ed.) are not cheap, and at the same time they are not going to work a day after you turn 59 years old (Americans can start renting funds from a personal retirement fund (IRA) upon reaching the age of 59,5 years. — Approx. ed.). That’s why you put a little money aside every month to make up the maximum amount allowed by your 401(k) retirement plan. And it also happens that you want to make savings — but last month nothing came of it, because new speakers were needed, otherwise there was a scratch on the old ones. And of course you’ve attended a corporate 401(k) briefing meeting, and you’ll be sure to sign the contract as soon as you find a pen.
Well, if you cannot boast of perfect self-discipline, do not be discouraged — you are not alone. We all want to contribute to a happy future — and we can not bring ourselves to take any steps for this. Recently, the Center for Retirement Research at Boston College conducted a study of the retirement savings of citizens. It turned out that 58% of Americans insured under the 401(k) program in 2007 still hadn’t made a single contribution. Disappointing information, isn’t it? And you can’t say that saving for retirement was so difficult: choose a fund, decide on the amount — and that’s it, then the money will be deducted automatically, and one fine day you will calmly reap the fruits of your prudence. Hello Sun City, here I am!
But for many of us, this simple task is overwhelming. First, many people have no idea about investing. Without a little bit of economic education, all these pension systems are a “dark forest” for us, and we can make a choice between the proposed conditions only intuitively. And secondly, and perhaps more importantly, most of us don’t like saving money. We want to put them off. We plan to postpone them. But when it comes to saving up, we spend every last penny on new jeans or teeth whitening.
Remember we said that there are several reasons why we fail to make reasonable intertemporal choices? The first reason was hyperbolic discounting. The second is known as the hot-cold empathy gap. We love this wording. And we love the idea that it stands for: when we are in a “cold” emotional state – that is, when we are calm, reasonable and balanced – we are 100% sure that we will remain that calm, reasonable and balanced in the future. . Have you ever noticed such internal monologues behind you?
- “As soon as I get to the cinema, I will go directly to the hall without even looking in the direction of the popcorn. If I really want to, I’ll chew my mixture of nuts and dried fruits — it’s a hundred times healthier!”
- “Tomorrow morning I have a kickboxing class, so I’ll go to Jim’s party for just an hour, have one drink and be home by ten.”
- “I’m going to the store for company, but I won’t buy anything — I’ll just look.”
- “None. Sex. Without. Condoms.»
From an «old school» point of view
Neoclassical economists do not attempt to offer any explanation for our inability to save. They do not go into the analysis of the complex and contradictory human psyche at all. Why? They are convinced that people are rational beings and they tend to do rational things: save money, snack on “tasty and healthy” beans, and spend a few minutes every day on preventive hugs with family and friends. According to their logic, we can all estimate how much money we need for a comfortable old age, divide this amount by the remaining 20,6 years of work for us, taking into account 2% inflation and income on a deposit with an average rate of 4%, and start making the necessary amounts right from this day. Looking at the interest capitalization chart below, the neoclassical economist can only shrug his shoulders: “And how can you not save money after that? What more reason do you people need?
In simple words: rdivergence between hot and cold empathy
Today: «Never again in my life will I drink all night.»
Tomorrow: «Okay, one more!»
Unfortunately, when the time comes to bring our plans to life, we leave the «cold» emotional state and get into the «hot» one — and then we easily break all the promises we made to ourselves.
“When a person, for example, is not hungry, afraid or in pain, it is very difficult for him to imagine how he will behave in any of these states, and to objectively assess the effect that these experiences can have on him,” writes George Loewenstein, an economist at Carnegie Mellon University and the author of the term «hot and cold empathy divergence.»
In a «hot» state, we stick around in the tavern until the very closing, and then we go home with the bartender — because it is our own business, whom to bring to our place! Instead of buying a 26″ CRT as planned, we fork over $3500 for a 35″ HB LED TV to finally watch all ten discs of the first part of the Neil Young archives (Canadian singer-songwriter . — Approx. ed.). We also buy a schnauzer puppy we saw in a pet shop window, gossip about our best friend, and fight with our husband because he again forgot to buy bags of peeled and trimmed carrots, which we usually give children with us to school.
In general, when we are in a “hot” emotional state, we say things that we later regret, do things that we later feel ashamed of, and inflict wounds on ourselves and others that take years to heal. And in the “cold” state, we cannot even imagine that we are capable of such a thing.
One particularly poignant study of the discrepancy between hot and cold empathy has recently been done. A group of male students at the University of California at Berkeley participated in an experiment designed to study «decision making and sexual arousal.» Students were asked various questions on the topic of sex, including their sexual preferences, propensities for risky sex and the ability to commit an immoral act of a sexual nature. But there was one caveat: when the students were interviewed the first time, they just had to imagine themselves aroused (that is, they were actually in a “cold” state), and the second time they were asked to masturbate before answering (that is, as you understand, go to the «hot» state).
You can probably guess how the two answers differed from each other — but we will still give you a more specific idea. When men in the «cold» state were asked if they could admit that they would be attracted to a 12-year-old girl, the average probability in their answers was 23 (despite the fact that 0 is not the slightest probability, 100 is a complete certainty). When hot, the average was 46. When asked if they could drug a woman to get her into bed, the average when cold was 5 and when hot, 26. Horrible.
There is no doubt that we are lustful, weak-willed, gluttonous spenders, doomed to live with a fat ass and an eternally offended spouse, to beg in retirement and, in especially difficult cases, to have a criminal case behind us. What are we to do with all this? Maybe we should put a lock on the refrigerator and put a personal trainer in our house? Maybe we should hire a personal accountant with a stun gun who will shock us every time we start spending our money on who knows what? Maybe we need to buy a heart rate monitor that will show us that we have moved into a “hot” state and are no longer able to make intelligent decisions?
Yes, that would probably help.
But, to our great joy, there is already a proven way to make the right intertemporal choice and, most importantly, how to stay true to your word. We are talking about the so-called tools of self-restraint — they can be anything that can make you do what you don’t want to do, but you need to. It is this role that a lock, a stun gun and a heart rate monitor can perform — all these things can quite effectively deal with our “impulses”.
But you can do without such «extreme» means.
There are many more benign «tools». Paying the full amount of taxes, for example, is not as painful as an electric shock, but it will also force you to save money: by giving the state more than it is required of you in the form of an interest-free loan, you will spend less money on unnecessary things. And at the end of the tax period, you will receive a tax deduction and can send a tidy sum straight to your savings account.
Still procrastinating with your 401(k) program? But this is also an excellent tool of self-restraint (maybe it will be if you still sign the contract). By deducting 6% of your salary every month, you remove from sin the money that could be spent on a wine cabinet or a mountain bike.
But somehow we got carried away discussing taxes and pension savings and completely forgot to mention the most important tool of self-restraint: marriage! In case you haven’t noticed yet, a marriage certificate is created just to oblige you to fulfill your obligations. Don’t have sex on the side. Think about someone else besides yourself. Don’t quit your job. Share all the joys and hardships of family life, raising children and communicating with relatives on both sides. To fully invest in a joint future.
Of course, we can slam the door at any moment. Half of married couples end up like this. But still, let’s not forget that we got married precisely in order to devote ourselves to a loved one, and not just to meet him.
Unfortunately, the daily work of marriage does not have the same motivating power as the marriage itself. Once the stamp is set, we begin to avoid drastic action. We endlessly put off serious conversations for later. We promise to get better. tomorrow. We refuse sex, we snap at any reason, we choose whether to put braces on our children or hire a math tutor because we could not save up for both. In short, although we have been honored to make a lifetime commitment, we lack the will to keep our tiny promises day in and day out.
So, if you can bring yourself to read to the end of this chapter, we promise to tell you some simple ways to make good intertemporal choices, minimize hyperbolic discounting, and avoid the divergence between hot and cold empathy. And if we put aside all these tricky words, we will show you how to curb your selfish lazy nature and unleash a reasonable, loving spouse, who, we are sure, languishes somewhere in the depths of your soul.
Bring the matter to mind
StickK.com, a website created by Yale University economist Dean Karlan, a colleague and one of his students, was one of the first cyber-tools of self-restraint. The site invites you to bet money or your reputation that you will do what you have planned. You make your own bet by setting the amount that will go from your account to some ridiculous charitable fund if you fail, and/or agreeing to have your family and friends receive a weekly email report on your successes or failures. Here are some of the promises:
- «Invite some pretty girl to a cafe.»
- «Setting aside money for the wedding / for the future.»
- «Stop cursing in front of children.»
- «Call Nana at least once a week.»
- «Ignore shit Jamie.»
EXAMPLE #1 Sides: Alice and Mark
Mark had had a terrible month, and Alice knew it. At first, both of their sons fell ill one after another, and since Alice was on a business trip, Mark had to take care of the children alone, clean up after them and four
change their bed linen once, because the boys vomited all night long. Then, as soon as the virus receded, Mark rushed to Arizona on the first flight at six in the morning, where he had work to do. There, he had only three days for everything about everything, while the two-hour time difference finally brought down his already disturbed life rhythms. In addition, shortly after his arrival, it turned out that he had picked up this stomach infection from children. Then his 87-year-old mother fell again somewhere and ended up in the hospital, so that when Mark returned from Arizona, he was waiting for mountains of documents from the insurance company, x-rays of the femoral neck and endless conversations with hundreds of mother’s attending physicians, which for some reason did not work. could not communicate with each other without an intermediary. He finally considered sending his mother to a nursing home, but the thought alone made him feel unbearably guilty.
“Yes, it was not the best month of my life,” he told us.
The fact that Mark carries an unbearable burden on his shoulders has long become the norm for their relationship with Alice. When they met eight years ago, he, a simple guy from Chicago, was a divorced, not very ambitious head of marketing at a mid-range company, and she was a brilliant director of content marketing at a large advertising agency, but, for some incomprehensible for Mark, by coincidence, in her 40s she was still lonely. Mark immediately saw in her everything that his ex-wife lacked: success, self-confidence and sexuality.
His ex-wife never had close friends, she was depressed all the time and suffered from a whole range of chronic ailments, the reality of which Mark always doubted a little. He wanted children, but she was not ready for such stress. He wanted to travel, but she considered travel a hassle. He felt bound hand and foot and could not decide to divorce such an unfortunate and helpless woman. until she announced her intention to settle her mother with them.
“She said that no one but her mother understands her so well,” Mark told us. “I said, ‘For God’s sake, I won’t live with you.’”
When a friend introduced him to Alice, he did not cherish any special hopes. A forty-year-old New York loner? He’d dated long enough to know what it meant: a terribly skinny, neurotic, fitness-obsessed woman who lives with three cats. Alice showed up to her first date in purple suede knee high boots and a perfectly fitted black dress. First impression: bright, elegant, not at all anorexic, slightly cold. Mark wasn’t sure he liked Alice yet, but he would have liked to sleep with her.
After the second bottle of wine, Alice thawed out. Her defenses were slightly weakened. She began to smile more often and showed him photos of her nephews and nieces, talking about how one of them — her favorite — reads Pretty Nancy before bed, tries to walk in plastic heels and does not take off her colored glass Mardi Gras beads. Alice even promised to take her to New Orleans’ French Quarter as a 16th birthday present.
Alice wanted her own children. But her personal life was a series of disasters. At first she had a boyfriend who was happy to have sex with her, but was too shy to take her hand in public. Then — a real estate agent who called her only in moments of urgent need (and always after ten in the evening). Then a Frenchman who was for French kissing but against the English language. Oh yes, and that banker who was allegedly terrified of “serious relationships” now wrote every day about the charms of his fiancée on Facebook.
Mark seemed different from all of them. He wanted something serious. He wanted a monogamous relationship that one day could probably develop into a happy, happy marriage. He was exactly as sweet and pleasant as she imagined a Midwestern boy to be, but he also had a very biting sense of humor that made him understandable and approachable.
“He was sincere. Among New York men, this is a rarity,” said Alice.
After ten months of intense romance, they got married, went to a reproductive health clinic, and had twins a year later. Alice was vehemently opposed to nannies (“Why pay someone else to do something we can do perfectly ourselves?”), but she liked her job, and she understood that for a normal life in New York they needed her salary. So they decided that Mark would take a part-time job and take care of the kids the rest of the time. And Alice will stay at her old job and continue to make crazy money.
Alice knew that Mark had a difficult role to play.
“Selling ad space online is just a game compared to raising two boys,” Alice told us. “I have always understood that.”
And as Mark survived the 48-hour run with the basin, the trip to Arizona, and her mother’s fall, Alice told herself deep down that she should unload him a little and give him a break.
She made a commitment to herself to get up early several times a week, cook the kids breakfast, and drive them to school—all of which Mark usually did, because he was used to waking up at dawn. She also decided that she would try to get back from work before dark, cook dinner for the whole family and thereby give Mark time to lie on the couch. And he will carve out some day to let him go on a “day off” — let him sleep or sit in a cafe and read a sports newspaper in peace and quiet.
All these were examples of intertemporal choices — that is, decisions that would affect their joint future. They would have affected Mark’s state of mind, the atmosphere in their house and her career (if one of her colleagues noticed that she often shed from work ahead of time, it would not have been without complaints).
But keeping her promises proved harder than Alice could have imagined. Every morning something more important happened than breakfast with the kids: a meeting she couldn’t miss, a presentation she needed another hour to prepare, a negotiation she’d already postponed twice. And she still returned home when Mark was already washing dishes for her sons. “Well, I’ll have time tomorrow,” she said to herself, crushing the remnants of Mark’s noodles. And I sincerely believed in it. But tomorrow came, and another important meeting arose from nowhere.
It’s okay, Alice told herself, I’ll give him a day off soon and pay him back for all his troubles.
But she couldn’t seem to find the right day. At some point, she remembered that the following weekend, her sons had a hockey game in some outback state of Connecticut. She circled this date on her calendar and promised herself to get up early that day — the coach began the warm-up at some inhumane time — and take the children to the game on her own, leaving Mark at home to watch the Chicago Bears blow out again. Of course, they will have to cancel the trip with their girlfriends that they planned for this weekend, but the husband is worth it. She wrote herself a reminder to warn Mark that she would go with the kids herself. And she said to herself: “I need to call the girls and refuse to travel.” And I even thought that it would be nice to hire a nanny for one day on my return and arrange something special for myself and Mark, like going to that Turkish restaurant that they once liked. Yes, after that they could still have sex!
But every day she once again forgot to return her plane ticket and write to her friends that she passed. Nor did she tell Mark that she wanted to take over the boys. She didn’t have time for anything.
I’ll take care of it tomorrow, she promised herself, once I’ve got other things done.
And when the following weekend came around and Mark was watching his sons’ hockey game from the stands, Alice was leafing through a glossy magazine aboard a plane flying to Florida with her girlfriends. The work squeezed all the juice out of her, but the tickets still turned out to be non-refundable. Besides, she wanted to get out of the house. “After a short break, I will be able to better cope with the role of a wife,” she convinced herself.
Problem: Hyperbolic Discounting
Remember the example we gave at the beginning of this chapter about the cost of going to the gym, spending six pluses, and purchasing eight? And the way we talked about telling ourselves not to go to class by cutting the value of future benefits in half?
Approximately the same calculations — only unconsciously — were carried out in her head by Alice when she once again put off helping Mark for later (Table 11). She would have had to sacrifice weekends with her friends to take the boys to a hockey game, but her good mood and her husband’s gratitude would be worth it. The benefits clearly outweighed the costs.
However, this benefit only loomed somewhere in the future. She seemed too abstract — who knows, maybe an exhausted husband will not appreciate her feat at all? And compared to today’s benefits — Pina Coladas and pedicures on the beach — Mark’s future good mood and gratitude did not seem like such a welcome reward. This is a classic hyperbolic discounting trick.
Table 11
Before we tell you about Mark’s reaction to Alice’s departure (I’d like to delay the climax a bit), we’ll give you another example of hyperbolic discounting that’s likely to be very close to your heart. It’s about cinema. Based on their own experience of going to video rental shops, a group of researchers decided to test how people are able to stick to such a simple plan as to go and get a movie they have already chosen.
Recruiting volunteers from the University of Illinois, the researchers gave them lists of films and asked them to choose three they would like to see. At the same time, one group had to immediately choose three films on the spot that they would watch in the future, and the other group had to choose one film at a time immediately before viewing. Neither group knew that the list consisted of two types of films: those that require some kind of intellectual effort from the viewer — Oscar winners (such as «Schindler’s List») or subtitled transfer tapes — and simple pictures like » Sleepless in Seattle.»
And what? The group that selected films for the future had high motives: 71% wanted to take something abstruse. But the group that chose films for the next evening tended towards light comedies — only 44% of them preferred something more impressive. Conclusion? We understand that for our spiritual enrichment, the critically acclaimed film «Piano» is more useful, but we will have time to get rich tomorrow — and today let’s review Mrs. Doubtfire.
As for Mark, even without researchers, he saw very well which path Alice chooses for herself — «if only not to strain.» And at the end of this ill-fated month, he was already seething with resentment. Why is his wife acting like this? Where does he wear it when he needs it?
After Alice returned from Florida, Mark finally let his feelings out. “You went to Florida, and here I have a mother in the hospital, children to keep up with, and even a mountain of work. Do you have a conscience?» — he said. Oh, and one more thing: he no longer knows where to hide his eyes from relatives who alternately visit his mother in the hospital, bring her food, entertain her with conversations — and Alice just ran in like that once, for the sake of decency. “I don’t have the strength to justify myself for you,” he said.
Alice’s first reaction was to retaliate: «Your mother can’t stand me!» But as soon as these words flew from her lips, she herself heard their falsity. Mark shook his head and left the room. It was a very bad sign.
In fact, Alice really had nothing to say. Naturally, she couldn’t tell him about how she planned to come home earlier (honestly!), cancel the trip (can you imagine what a sacrifice!) and become a better person (seriously!). She could not admit that she saw how hard it was for Mark, and did nothing to help him.
She thought about telling him that the job was distributing bonuses, so she became quite twirled, but she imagined how it would sound and made the wise decision to remain silent. In a moment of burning self-pity, she began to mentally make a list of everything that she now lacks, which she had to give up in favor of the family: no more Pilates, no more parties, no more sleepovers with friends.
She decided not to talk about it either.
We are a little ashamed that we put Alice in such a bad light, because, in truth, so many of us behave this way. We cannot resist the usual course of our lives. We promise ourselves that we will support our other half, and then with relief we forget about our plan. But let’s remember the
the current wisdom that all parents and teachers have been quoting from generation to generation: “And if everyone jumps out the window, will you too?”
“I honestly wanted to help Mark,” Alice told us, “but I was distracted all the time.”
Way Out: Tools of Self-Restriction
After an argument with Mark, Alice had a «crisis of conscience». She understood that in their couple she became that eternally busy husband whom she herself would not wish for herself, and she wanted to change something. But how and where to start? First of all, she decided to make a list of those problematic issues, «hot topics» that complicated their relationship. And then come up with an instrument of self-restraint for everyone (of course, she did not know this term, but this did not prevent her from intuitively choosing the right path).
Problem: Late dinners with clients three times a week, because of which Mark is left alone with the children in the evenings, feeding them himself and putting them to bed.
Decision: Arrange breakfasts with clients. There will be no more reason to stay late at the office.
Problem: Complete indifference to the sports activities of sons.
Decision: Sign up as an assistant on their hockey team. If Alice doesn’t show up for matches after that, the other moms will eat her alive.
Problem: mother-in-law.
Decision: Promise to bring her lunch every Monday. To do this, Alice, completely incapable of cooking, agreed with the restaurant and paid for ready meals for a month in advance.
Problem: Little time spent alone with Mark.
Decision: Hire a nanny to come for one Saturday night a month and pay her in advance. As with a restaurant, paying up front will make you think twice before canceling your Saturday date.
It was a great plan, but like any other plan, it could not be 100% realized. Inevitably, some obstacles arose that prevented the fulfillment of the plan. Alice still had unforeseen business trips, and she still sometimes had to sit in the office until night. But Mark didn’t complain.
“I see that she is trying,” he said, “and that alone is enough for me.”
help yourself
During our tour of the country, couples told us about some of the intricate tools of self-restraint they had invented—although, of course, none of them had any idea that the tools they invented had anything to do with economics.
- In order to maintain physical fitness, sign up for a charity marathon and train for several months before the race. It’s hard to back down when you’ve already raised $3000 from friends and acquaintances to fight leukemia.
- To leave the city for three days, giving her husband the right to put the child to bed according to his own “let him yell” method. You are unlikely to be able to fly into the room and rush to lull a crying baby if you are separated by tens of kilometers.
- Sign up for a tricky banking service: Every time one spouse’s credit card is charged more than $50, the other gets a notification. Now you can’t spend a lot of money on new shoes or expensive wine without informing your other half.
EXAMPLE #2 Parties: Howard and Jen
Howard himself readily admits that his character is still the same. «He’s a boor,» Jen told us in a casual tone in a personal conversation in the absence of Howard. But it’s not entirely his fault, she added, because he grew up with four brothers and was forced to fight bloody battles for every milligram of parental attention. We thought she was very condescending towards her husband.
After college, Howard entered law school, where study was a solid race to the bottom, and graduated as a criminal lawyer — a profession not for squishy people. His job was to represent murderers and thieves in court. His list of hobbies included football, extreme barbecues and car racing.
“Some men play golf. And mine drives a car at a speed of 160 kilometers per hour, ”says Jen.
Although Howard had mellowed a little over the years, at 44 he still had a violent temperament that he himself was unable to control. And among the things that pissed him off, there was one that he especially hated: the mess. He hated mess! Every day he dreamed of returning to a quiet, tidy house, not to a living room littered with dog bone balls, all sorts of plastic rubbish, crumbled bread sticks and toy cars.
Jen was also a sought-after lawyer, also grew up in a larger family and also dreamed of order in the house. She worked in the same nervous environment, returned home just as tired, and she also wanted peace and quiet and a glass of martini. But, unlike Howard, she could close her eyes to the surrounding chaos and concentrate on communicating with the children.
“Martini helps,” she comments.
When Howard was once again turned on by the mess, Jen tried to instill in him the idea that children could not help making a mess. But her husband remained deaf to her admonitions.
However, Howard always ignored what she told him. In college, he asked her out over and over again, no matter how many times she turned him down. The first time he «rolled up» to her in line at the cafeteria. Then he made a second call at a student party. And again received a turn from the gate.
“Howard followed me for six years until I gave up,” says Jen. — I then listened to The Smiths and met with young poets. And Howard, in my opinion, never listened to music in his life. He was a classic self-confident male.»
After college, Jen moved to Washington to work for a charity that helped refugees from Palestine. Howard went to law school nearby, in Georgetown, but, although his ardor was somewhat tempered there, he was still a daredevil. One day, he showed up to Jen’s party with his leg in a cast — he unsuccessfully jumped off a helicopter when he and his friends arranged extreme skiing in the mountains near Lake Tahoe.
“I come from Long Island,” he told us, “there was nowhere for me to learn to ski.”
One Christmas day, two years out of college, they were both stuck in Washington. He — because of work (for him there were no weekends or holidays at all), she — because of the snowfall, which did not allow her to fly home. She did not have a boyfriend at that time, and she was threatened with a sad Christmas evening all alone. And then Howard called, saying that he could come in and cook something tasty for her. «Let’s have a depressing cooking party,» he said.
Howard brought two bottles of red wine, made his grandmother’s seafood spaghetti, and completely won over Jen when he offered to eat it all with one can of ice cream.
After that he stayed for the night.
All of a sudden, Howard didn’t seem like such a jerk to Jen.
“He was great,” Jen said. “He surrounded me with care and attention, tried to anticipate my desires and give me pleasure.”
In the next two days, they left the apartment only once — to buy a Christmas tree, which they then dressed up naked.
Before the birth of the children, Howard’s temperament did not strain Jen. She was used to him lashing out at the waiter if there was something wrong with his order. And it even amused her how he lowered the window in the car and shouted out curses after the driver who cut him off. She winked sympathetically at the waiter, or put her hand on Howard’s shoulder in the car and said, “Howard! Quiet». And, as a rule, he calmed down.
But after the appearance of children, Howard began to flare up from the slightest spark. Now he worked even harder and slept even less. Their personal lives shrank to «once every two weeks» because Jen didn’t have the energy for her. And Howard failed to comprehend the most important feature of children’s nature — namely, that they are not able from birth to anticipate his desires and adapt to his mood.
“Howard is a good father,” Jen told us. He loves sons. He taught them to swim. And say «please» and «thank you» and call grandma once a week. In many ways he is more patient than I am. But he also has this crazy, dark side that comes up every now and then.»
Howard put on an evening concert at least once a week. He would walk into the house—strung up from the traffic jam, irritated from lack of sleep, hungry and angry about the pressures of his job—and he would vociferously resent the rubbish left undiscarded, the bikes not cleared out of the garage path, and the pile of “those damn toys” on the floor. .
“Is it really that hard to play in just one room?! — he asked everyone who was within earshot — as a rule, these were his wife, children and two cats scattered in the corners. “Why buy containers for toys if no one needs them anyway?”
Problem: The Gap Between Hot and Cold Empathy
After calming down, drinking a glass of wine and thinking that he again ruined the evening for everyone, Howard swore each time: no scandals tomorrow. But tomorrow came, and he again let loose all the dogs.
Like everyone who had to make an intertemporal choice, Howard knew that the decision he made now would have consequences in the future. He knew that his choice of balanced behavior would benefit both his wife and children, not to mention himself (nervous men die before their peers, do they? He kind of read about it somewhere.). His equations were elementary:
- Good dad = Children love me and grow up to be adequate members of society.
- Bad dad = Kids hate me and grow up to be potential serial killers.
- Good husband = Satisfied wife and maybe even good sex.
- Bad husband = Divorce and the prospect of becoming a lonely old pervert who stares at girls while sitting on a bench in the park.
The problem was that Howard made the decision to curb his temper after the next scene — that is, when he had already had dinner, drank wine and became kinder. In other words, in a «cold» emotional state. As you remember, at such moments we are all able to reason calmly and sensibly. In addition, at these moments we somehow miraculously forget how we behaved in a «hot» state. Therefore, the «cold» Howard felt that it would be nothing for him to be the same «cold» on any other evening, and he convinced himself that he would easily leave his outbursts of rage in the past.
Jen told her husband that his character spoils the nervous system of the whole family. And each time she complained that, as soon as he crossed the threshold in such an electrified state, «children’s hair stand on end.»
He promised to pull himself together, and they began to think of ways to do it.
What if you leave work early and go to the gym? Jen suggested. — I would burn with calories and my negativity.
‘Then I’ll be home by nightfall,’ said Howard.
— Maybe buy CDs with music for meditation and listen in the car? Jen suggested.
«You don’t know me that well?» Howard replied.
“Try to count to twenty before entering the house,” Jen suggested.
Let me count to twenty and we’ll have sex? Howard replied. He was ready to raise the subject under any pretext.
“Oh, I’m so tired,” Jen said, pushing her husband away. “Do you know how much effort I spent trying to calm the kids after your dive bomber raid?”
I understand, I’m sorry, I won’t do it again.
And so from time to time. Going from «hot» to «cold», Howard was sure that the next time he returned from work on his nerves, he could remain an adequate person. He knew that he had a difficult character, but he was convinced that he could handle himself. He’s in control now!
But again and again, on the way home from the office, something pissed him off, and he was again reborn into a monster. «Hot» Howard burst into the house, and everything that was planned by the calm, balanced, collected Howard went to hell. Like Alice in the previous example, Howard couldn’t stick to his plan. And he needed something much more substantial than discs with soothing music to help him.
Way Out: Tools of Self-Restriction
Howard and Jen have spent years managing Howard’s rage. They tried counting to twenty (to no avail) and even tried breathing exercises (not even close to no good).
“What kind of gymnastics is there when a person does not have time to breathe before the next volley of abuse,” Jen told us.
Finally, they came up with their own way.
They invented a tool of self-restraint that allowed both of them to get what they lacked for happiness. Howard — more sex, Jen — more calm and good-natured Howard. They called their method «the game of red flags.» As soon as Jen saw that Howard was about to break, she said: «Flag.» If Howard managed to go without a “flag” for three days, she agreed to have sex. If he lasted a week, she agreed to have sex for two days in a row (provided, of course, that after the first time he did not receive another “flag”). And if a month — she brought to life everything that his lustful darling wants.
But they also foresaw a «reverse move». If Howard went crazy and earned a red flag, they didn’t have sex for a week. Two «flags» — and he was obliged to massage Jen’s legs every evening for a week. Three flags, and Jen got a day at the spa, and Howard got the task of taking the kids to music class and football practice.
“It was necessary to come up with some kind of motivation,” says Jen, “and sex just turned out to be a very logical option.”
Jen feared that the red flag idea was doomed to failure, like all the other ways they invented. At best, she could count on him to endure bullying for a couple of weeks, and then turn into an uncontrollable monster again.
“I read enough books on psychology to understand that he can’t be changed,” says Jen. “I married a boor — he will remain a boor for the rest of his life.”
But she was wrong. As dubious as this “game” of sex for good behavior may seem to you (what is it anyway?), it was the key to success. Not least because she allowed Jen and Howard to focus only on the problem of curbing anger and not introspection. They didn’t look for reasons in Howard’s childhood traumas, they avoided years of trips to psychologists, and they didn’t let Howard’s seizures develop into nightly scandals until dawn.
Howard and Jen were looking for a solution to a specific problem—they didn’t want to procrastinate on it and everything connected with it to the point of losing momentum. And since they both needed something from each other, they found a way to satisfy their desires. We would say that this was a very economical approach.
Everything turned out to be very simple. Howard walked into the house, glanced at the cars on the floor, and Jen could see in his face how it was starting to start. But then he looked at her, and realization flickered in his eyes: another second, and she would say the code word «flag». Then he hung up his coat, took off his shoes and tried to bring himself into a «cold» state.
“I don’t know what he was saying to himself,” says Jen, “but he asked the boys to give him a minute and soon came into the living room in a much better mood.”
Thanks to this game, Howard and Jen got much more sex. Moreover, Howard soon got so good at calming himself down that Jen could hardly cope with her «bed» duties.
“One or two times a week is fine for me, but lately Howard can go a month without tantrums,” she told us. “So, as they say, be careful what you wish for.”
Economist in bed
In the course of writing this book, we have spoken to many economists. Even with some Nobel Prize winners. And their overall IQ would probably be somewhere around 3600. But that didn’t stop us from asking them for advice on how to improve our sex life. After all, don’t geniuses have sex?
“I’m often asked for advice,” said Gary Becker, winner of the 1992 Nobel Prize and the 2007 Presidential Medal of Freedom, and one of the first scientists to study the economics of marriage. “And I often think: “Why don’t you take money for consultations, you would get rich.”
Another economist who wished to remain anonymous told us that he and his wife have been showering together every day for 40 years. And I concluded that it’s all a matter of habit.
And George Loewenstein — the same one who put forward the concept of cold and hot empathy — said that arousal (that is, the transition to a «hot» state) simply from the presence of the second half in the room is something that is not characteristic of people who are married to experience. This means that when they think about whether to have sex or not, they are in a «cold» state — say, washing dishes or brushing their teeth. And in this case, in order to fulfill their plan, they lack just the ardor.
Levenshtein proposed two ways to keep the flame from dying out. The first is to introduce a rule: if one person wants sex, the second has no right to refuse. No veto. The second is to decide on the frequency and try to match. “Sex is good for your health and helps keep relationships,” Loewenstein told us. Yes, Professor Levenshtein, you are as right as ever.