Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Comment: Equal marriage will boost the economy

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Midnighter 7 Jun 2013, 10:43pm

    Very interesting.

    One niggle: the lack of citations for the source studies quoted is an unfortunate omission; if an article such as this is going to persuade others it really needs to show its credentials in this way, or it is all to easy to dismiss it as unfounded opinion.

    1. While you are correct in that it would be proper and more legitimate to quote sources, do you think that is going to matter to those “luddites”? Theys gonna hate no matter what.

      1. Midnighter 8 Jun 2013, 9:48am

        Of course, however even in debates and discussions with them online or elsewhere it is more about the audience than the opponent.

        There are also plenty of “undecided” still out there too. This sort of argument would appeal greatly to my brother-in-law the accountant, who otherwise is very “meh” about the whole thing. He is just the sort of tidy-minded person who would spot the (currently) unsupported claims and discount those parts of the argument.

  2. Agree it’s interesting.

    I’m completely convinced of the economic case for equal marriage, but I do have a few problems with this article. The idea that every so-called economist agrees not just with equal marriage, but equality in general, is just silly. Anyone can find an economist to back up their point of view.

    The thought of human societal value being measured by economic contribution, or “human capital” as you put it, isn’t something that sits comfortably with me. I don’t necessarily think increasing consumption and production is a good thing, or that economic inequality will be reduced by reducing social inequality. The link between the environmental crisis and equal marriage is tenuous.

    I would also agree with midnighter about the lack of sources and references. I looked for these on the original article posted on your page on UBS’s website, but this is also completely reference-free. Not good practice given the number of stats and studies mentioned.

    1. Well said, Stuart N.

  3. GingerlyColors 8 Jun 2013, 7:14am

    Having marriage equality will boost Britain’s image as a haven for civil liberties abroad and that can only be good not just for businesses who wish to invest in the UK but also for the tourist trade.

  4. Yes, it’s very true that “if a group in society are told again and again that they are less valuable, they are likely to be less ambitious and to underachieve academically or in the workplace” and that “that robs the economy of human capital it would otherwise have had”.

    On the other hand, we must guard against the belief of some economists that ANYTHING which produces monetary profits is a good thing. That belief is sadly much in exercise and in the form of transnational and corporate practices it’s causing the deterioration or destruction of not only parts of our communities but of the planetary ecosystem in which we all live.

    For example, we witness the continued refusals of many profit-hungry transnationals to modify their behaviour so as to decelerate the effects of catastrophic climate-change because they don’t wish to see their monetary gains diminished.

    1. Or to make the case clearer. If lots of wealthy, or even not so wealthy, gay couples choose to stage their big day (their weddings) on remote romantic islands and to fly their guests there, then, yes, that will be good for clothing outfitters, for the airlines, for the local hotels and for the local caterers, but it will not be good in terms of respecting the environment and its resources.

      So I would prefer to take finance OUT of any arguments regarding the appropriateness of same sex marriage, and to put forward as a model of same sex weddings, dignified and inexpensive low-key arrangements which are more about the important meaning of the event and the sharing of it with the local community.

      But no doubt we will see some ridiculously expensive and outrightly vulgar same sex weddings, just as we continue to see appallingly extravagant and vulgar heterosexual weddings.

  5. Sister Mary Clarence 8 Jun 2013, 1:48pm

    Actually I think you’ll probably find that Paul Donovan, Global Economist, Managing Director at UBS Bank is probably perfectly sufficient as a source of information. The guy writes a (daily) commentary on his opinion on the global economy and as his ‘opinion’ it is followed and taken note of. Having looked at that it isn’t littered with sources and references, he simply gives his views (and seemingly they are listened to).

    1. “Managing Director at UBS Bank” = banking supremo.

      And have we not heard sufficient of the ruses and japes of big bankers over the past five years to know that one ought most certainly NOT to automatically place trust in what they say and do?

      Have we not read enough of the ways in which they have manipulated high finance for the benefit of the 1% and the loss of the 99%?

      I’m not at all surprised that a banker after looking at the question of Same Sex Marriage has concluded that it’s a good thing in terms of the making of money!

      I wonder if this particular banker, in exchange for what he seems to believe our weddings are likely to contribute to the banks, might like to offer we gay and lesbian people an exclusive rate of interest significantly above the utterly pathetic rates of interest that bankers are currently offering savers in general?

  6. onesecond 8 Jun 2013, 3:16pm

    I am sure that there are people that have no problems damaging humans but will rethink their positions if they realize that they are damaging human capital. It is a sick world.

  7. Can’t economist think for themselves? it seems like ever since Niel Patrick Harris sang “There’s money to be made” @ 2:02 of http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_hyT7_Bx9o all economist sound like a reverberating echo!

  8. Other, even more obvious benefits include the fact that:

    (1) married people tend to enjoy better health than single people (on average) partly because they have someone to keep an eye on them and partly because potentially unhealthy behaviour such as smoking, recreational drugs, alcohol and multiple sexual partners are more associated with the single state.

    (ii) married couples are obliged to support each other financially, and are statistically more likely to still be around to look after each other when sick, elderly etc.

  9. hint it funny that straights are asking all us LGBT, to help them out with the economy, that will only happen when all straights help us get same-sex marriage, and be equal.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all