Getting money is good for your health, but working hard for your money, in the way people work harder in boom times, and spending it with gusto, in the way people spend more after payday, is bad for your health. Here is the evidence.
An explanation for within-cycle mortality is that deaths are fraudulently postponed. Also, people expecting death may hold on for the sake of their heirs (this makes more sense for SS than for paychecks).
Actually, heavy drinking has been implicated in triggering both heart attacks and strokes. So payday binges might be the major factor here, with acquired chronic alcoholism and drug binging during boom times running second.
But we should probably look at economic bubbles, too. Chasing a dream can be very stressful, finding out you've only chased a mirage even more so. People who work too hard often end up playing too hard to compensate, but just the work itself (and the disappointment in losing out on the Ponzi Scheme, as most participants do, and consequent unemployment, losing health coverage, neglecting ailments because of that) might be culprit enough.
Nobel Laureate Vernon Smith has done econ lab work suggesting that a better (and freer, and more transparent) regulatory arrangement for forward markets would tend to smooth out bubbles and significantly mute "animal spirits". In a fascinating and wide ranging interview, he bemoaned the fact that it would take a "policy entrepreneur" to get such policy enacted.Well, we've got lots of policy entrepreneurship around health care right now, and there's probably more to come. At the same time, economists are moaning that regulatory reform seems to be stalled. Maybe it's time to establish some linkage: both bubbles and their catastrophic aftermaths are hazardous to your health, smoothing them out would not only make people wealthier in the long run, but healthier. Using markets to smooth out markets is also good public health policy, not just economic management. What's not to like?Chances of it happening? Well, wish on a star, baby. But at the very least, maybe insurance companies will start offering better rates to people who sign up for salary payment plans that pay out much more incrementally - or even just for those who take their pay packet on a Monday, rather than a Friday with everyone else.
Assuming alcohol is the primary culprit, I wouldn't expect the date of consumption to correlate so nicely with the mortality spike unless a large portion of the alcohol-related fatalities in question take the form of sudden accidents (e.g., drunk driving). The other detrimental effects of drinking are slow and cumulative, so I would expect them to be more uniformly distributed.
An explanation for within-cycle mortality is that deaths are fraudulently postponed. Also, people expecting death may hold on for the sake of their heirs (this makes more sense for SS than for paychecks).
I notice that my posts where I pose puzzles get a lot less comments than posts that make claims.
This paper is just like your discussions about men vs. women: you can look at numbers, or you can listen to hip-hop:
http://www.youtube.com/watc...
It has a Wikipedia page:
Actually, heavy drinking has been implicated in triggering both heart attacks and strokes. So payday binges might be the major factor here, with acquired chronic alcoholism and drug binging during boom times running second.
But we should probably look at economic bubbles, too. Chasing a dream can be very stressful, finding out you've only chased a mirage even more so. People who work too hard often end up playing too hard to compensate, but just the work itself (and the disappointment in losing out on the Ponzi Scheme, as most participants do, and consequent unemployment, losing health coverage, neglecting ailments because of that) might be culprit enough.
Nobel Laureate Vernon Smith has done econ lab work suggesting that a better (and freer, and more transparent) regulatory arrangement for forward markets would tend to smooth out bubbles and significantly mute "animal spirits". In a fascinating and wide ranging interview, he bemoaned the fact that it would take a "policy entrepreneur" to get such policy enacted.Well, we've got lots of policy entrepreneurship around health care right now, and there's probably more to come. At the same time, economists are moaning that regulatory reform seems to be stalled. Maybe it's time to establish some linkage: both bubbles and their catastrophic aftermaths are hazardous to your health, smoothing them out would not only make people wealthier in the long run, but healthier. Using markets to smooth out markets is also good public health policy, not just economic management. What's not to like?Chances of it happening? Well, wish on a star, baby. But at the very least, maybe insurance companies will start offering better rates to people who sign up for salary payment plans that pay out much more incrementally - or even just for those who take their pay packet on a Monday, rather than a Friday with everyone else.
Assuming alcohol is the primary culprit, I wouldn't expect the date of consumption to correlate so nicely with the mortality spike unless a large portion of the alcohol-related fatalities in question take the form of sudden accidents (e.g., drunk driving). The other detrimental effects of drinking are slow and cumulative, so I would expect them to be more uniformly distributed.
"Spending money like a drunken sailor" in the old phrase, which describes men on liberty with a pocket full of payday the world over.
I'm guessing it's the drinking and not the spending which is detrimental to one's health!