That's fucking stupid

Posts Tagged ‘economics’

I recently read the brilliant book “The Economic Naturalist” by Robert H Frank. The book uses real world examples to illustrate some basic economic principals in a way that makes them clear to apply to other situations. I shall no doubt be adding cost/benefit analysis to many of my subsequent posts and if you haven’t read the book then please take the time to do so because understanding the concepts within makes the world around us a little clearer.

Within the book I found only one section that I did not agree with and that is, oddly enough, the section that inspired the front cover.

“Why is milk sold in rectangular containers while soft drinks are sold in round ones?”

The conclusion in the book is that it is largely due to the fact that rectangular containers are a more efficient use of shelf space and that as they need to be kept in the fridge that space incurs a cost but soft drinks, stored on the shelf as they are, do not incur this cost and so are packaged in cylinders (I expect it is the efficiency of space in transit that is more important though as milk, and indeed rectangular cartons of fresh fruit juice, have to be kept refrigerated and moved quickly from production to point of sale while soft drinks that are often sold chilled are transported normally).

The secondary reasons given are that soft drink cans are more able to withstand pressure and as they are drunk from the can the cylinder is easier to hold. I can’t argue with any of these however I do think that the real reason is hinted at in the very first sentence of the explanation:

Virtually all soft-drink containers, whether aluminium or glass, are cylindrical. Milk containers, certainly plastic and cardboard ones, are almost always rectangular in cross section.

Those who still have their milk delivered to their doors in cylindrical containers may have already realised that it is not the contents that determine the shape but the material used to make the packaging. Glass and aluminium are expensive compared to cardboard and plastic and so the shape chosen must be the one which uses the least surface area for a given volume of content. I did some rough maths based on the assumption that I wanted to house 1000ml if liquid in a vessel that is 15cm high (the assumption comes from one of fixed shelf heights).

The maths  proved that while a square based vessel would have a surface area of around 613cm² the cylinder of the same height and volume would have a surface area of only 604cm², the 9cm² of aluminium sheet or glass saved each time would probably yield a large saving over time.

Weighing up the costs and the benefits of any behaviour is the basics of economics, human behaviour and the most important thing that our government should be educated on. Over recent decades the costs and benefits of numerous behavours has become skewed and this has had a knock on effect to society at large.

In the UK we have one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in the world. As a society we have spent a long time increasing the benefits to young girls for getting pregnant, often by giving them a flat and a constant income. We have also spent considerable time reducing the costs by removing the massive social stigma that used to be attached to young girls getting pregnant outside of marriage.

We have a problem with crime because while the benefits have not changed much the costs have been reduced. There is less social stigma attached to criminal behaviour and the chances of incurring a cost through arrest and imprisonment are vastly reduced.

Our social care bill is greatly increased because the state has taken much of the responsibility away from the individual. This lack of responsibility and lack of consequences has swung the cost/benefit balance in favour of the individual claiming long term social care. Social care or welfare state handouts used to be accompanied by a number of costs, most importantly the social stigma. Without this cost there is very little preventing people from living off of state handouts for their entire life.

Childhood obesity in the UK is at an all time high because there is a benefit for someone with poor parenting skills feeding their child foods that are high in sugars, fats and salts; they taste good and the kids will eat them without a fight. Take the humble brussel sprout, the cost attached to it is the time taken to prepare it and the time taken persuading the offspring to eat it. For many parents the cost outweighs the negligible benefit of knowing their kid will grow up healthy. A chip on the other hand has a lower cost because it is quick and easy to prepare and takes very little effort to get the kids to eat it. Most healthy foods are not as attractive to kids so Jamie Oliver and his cohorts will always be fighting the fact that most parents are lazy and can’t be bothered with a daily battle getting their kids to eat their greens.

If your kid looks like this then you are a child abuser.

The solution is to redress the balance. Increase the social stigmas of antisocial or selfish behavours again. A simple solution for childhood obesity would be to publish an acceptable maximum weight and weigh the kids each term in school. Those who go over the maximum acceptable weight are listed on a letter home to all parents. Shame the parents into realising that neglecting their kids by not educating them in the importance of a healthy diet is just another form of child abuse.