'Continued Existence of Cows Disproves Central Tenets of Capitalism?'

A click-baity economics paper proves a central tenet of Internet journalism: When in doubt, simplify and exaggerate.
More
Reuters

Just a hunch here, but I think economists are starting to figure out the secrets of this whole internet headline writing thing. As evidence, take the ridiculously click-baity title of this post (yep, I admit it), which I've cribbed from a new working paper by researchers at Yale and the University of Pennsylvania. Sadly, like oh so many question headlines, this one oversells a bit. The paper does not really appear to call into question the foundations of modern capitalism based on the ongoing survival of longhorns, dairy cows, black angus beef cows or any other bovine breed. But it does offer up a pretty interesting economic puzzle involving cattle and India. 

As you might have heard at some point, cows are pretty big in India, and along with buffalo, are considered prize possessions for many of the country's rural families. But, after breaking down a batch of economic survey data, the researchers come to a surprising conclusion: the cattle, on average, are money losers. 

Our main finding is that, on average, households earn negative returns on their investments in cows and buffaloes if labor is valued at market wages: we estimate average returns of negative 64% and negative 39% for cows and buffaloes respectively. If we value the household’s own labor at zero, estimated average returns increase, to negative 6% for cows and positive 13% for buffaloes.

So why do households keep investing in livestock? The paper offers a few theories. Some Hindu families might see religious or social benefits in cow ownership (though that doesn't explain why they keep their non-sacramental buffalo around). Others might be betting on hitting the four-legged lottery; though the average cow is a cost sink, the researchers find that top 20 percent can deliver returns of more than 300 percent. Meanwhile, since much of the milk that's sold commercially in India is contaminated with delightful things like bleach and fertilizer, rural families might consider fresh, homemade milk particularly valuable. If the local labor market doesn't offer a great number of job opportunities, especially to women, the opportunity cost of staying home and tending to some farm animals might also be lower than the paper estimates. And finally, some might treat their cattle as a (somewhat ineffective) form of savings — which would suggest India needs to help rural families find more effective ways of stowing their money away. 

Oh wait, there's one more. As the authors point out, their survey data might just be off.

Anyway, it's something to ruminate over. But seriously, great title. 

Jump to comments
Presented by

Jordan Weissmann is a senior associate editor at The Atlantic.

Get Today's Top Stories in Your Inbox (preview)

Why Are Americans So Bad at Saving Money?

The US is particularly miserable at putting aside money for the future. Should we blame our paychecks or our psychology?


Elsewhere on the web

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register. blog comments powered by Disqus

Video

The Death of Film

You'll never hear the whirring sound of a projector again.

Video

How to Hunt With Poison Darts

A Borneo hunter explains one of his tribe's oldest customs: the art of the blowpipe

Video

A Delightful, Pixar-Inspired Cartoon

An action figure and his reluctant sidekick trek across a kitchen in search of treasure.

Video

I Am an Undocumented Immigrant

"I look like a typical young American."

Video

Why Did I Study Physics?

Using hand-drawn cartoons to explain an academic passion

Writers

Up
Down

More in Business

Just In