Andy Griffith and the externalities of vaccinations

I noticed some discussions about vaccination requirements in the US lately, and thought enough about it to put in some comments.

First off, I think I understand where some politicians are coming from when they assert that people have a choice. We don't want a government handing down edicts concerning our health. Legislation regulating consumption of tobacco, alcohol, marijuana, and trans fats seem to spark this fear. However, in the case of the above examples, the government seems to be making better use of their resources informing the public rather than restricting them.

The same goes for vaccines. I don't think anyone over 50 longs for days of cholera, polio, small pox, typhoid and tetanus, because they have memories of the pain associated with experiencing those diseases. Maybe we should use the limited resources available to public health organizations to better inform a younger generation.

I remember chicken pox as a rite of passage with baking soda baths and misery.While it was not deadly, I am appreciative of not having to endure those abysmal two weeks with my children due to the relatively new chicken pox vaccine. I fear, however, my children, having not experienced it themselves, may feel the need to opt out.

Now, let's get to the mandatory vaccines. First, I am sympathetic to making them non-mandatory (freedom, rights, blah blah blah), but let's look at the externalities. You remember those from econ, the effects of an individual's decisions on another individual's happiness. It turns out that if you don't get the measles vaccine, then you are more likely to get the measles. Which means you put a drain on productivity and health care. That increases my health costs, or taxes, and increases prices, because the cost of labor went up. Secondly, even though I have the vaccine, there is a small chance it may not work in me. That wouldn't bother me if I knew that everyone had the vaccine, which means nobody has it and I won't come in contact with it. But if enough people don't get vaccinated, then that increases the chances of an unsuccessful vaccine meeting an infected person. Yikes! Third, vaccines are administered in time intervals. In other words, you are not fully vaccinated once you are born. That puts infants, and even young children at the highest risk. It is this point that I personally get irritated, and probably where the mandatory vaccines enter: at the public school level.

Let me conclude that while the politicians constitutional purity is noble, to the extent that the existing vaccines have been vetted, there many other issues that need to be addressed. In particular, better information.

Andy Griffith, my TV hero, sings a song to Rafe Hollister because he refuses to get a tetanus shot. The Andy Griffith Show episode is "County Nurse", and really fits well with the conversation today. The song is a great response to the rejection of vaccines, and would make a fitting advertisement for promoting vaccinations.

Signaling Ever(ly)where

It has gotten to the point where I cannot even listen to music without thinking about economics. Having a bit of nostalgia about nostalgia and burn through an iTunes gift card, I decided to listen to some Everly Brothers. The first song up, Crying in the Rain.



The premise is that some boy just got his heart broken by his girlfriend. He is upset, but he doesn't want to reveal this to the girl. Crying is a sign of severe weakness in a man, and this boy is deeply concerned about his reputation. Not only would he not want to allow the girl the satisfaction of knowing the damage she did to him, but he probably does not want future prospects to learn of it either. How does one hide crying? By crying when it is raining outside. I can imagine the conversation,

Girl: Hi. Are you crying?

Boy: No, no. Those are just raindrops streaming down my cheeks.

Girl: Oh, okay, then. I'm meeting my new boyfriend. He has a motorcycle.

Boy: Really? Is it still raining?



But wait. Wouldn't the girl know that he is crying every time he steps out when it is raining, you may ask? Not necessarily. Imagine there are two types of boys: wimpy and  stoic. Wimpys cry and Stoics do not. However, both types will go outside when it rains. Therefore, the action of going outside is not a separating equilibrium. However, the action of not going outside when it is not raining would be revealing. Hence, the last verse indicates this lack hiding his type when he longs to be able to "walk in the sun".



Not to be critical, but the boy must be a wreck if he is crying so much that he hold it in for a few minutes to go outside unless it is raining. How about taking a shower, cutting some onions, or watching Brian's Song?

Nutcracker Suite and Strategy

My wife and I had the opportunity to watch the Nutcracker Suite performed at the Musical Arts Center at Indiana University. I am a big fan. I have seen it many times in St. Louis and in Chicago. What does this have to do with economics? Well, for starters, there is pricing. There are four different prices based on location. But it does not take into account the big bar strategically constructed to cross the orchestra or stage. Bah! I wonder why seats are not priced more specifically. For example, the first few rows of the mezzanine are deprived of viewing the orchestra completely. And then the rail bar. I want a discount, or at least a coupon to a chiropractor. Come to think of it, I noticed a few prominent doctors in the leading donors section. Hmmmm. 

Finally, I was impressed with the production’s efforts to fill the seats. There were definitely more children dancers than adult performers. Just think of all those proud parents, grandparents, and jealous siblings sitting in the audience. In spite of the unprecedented number of children ballerinas and ballerinos, there were no falls. The adult performers, however, decided to improvise a new Tchaikovsky movement, Beer (Irish Dance).