If I remember the literature correctly a standard argument in the literature on the economics of the family is that people "save" by investing in their children as a response to capital market imperfections, and norms like bequests, dowries, bridewealth, etc. evolved in response to the fact that in their absence the intergenerational bargain is unenforceable: if we invest heavily in our son, there's nothing really to prevent him from shirking during his peak earning years unless we can forge a pair of golden handcuffs.

Fatherhood and rapid technological advances have led me to wonder about whether the efficiency of parent-child bargains will change. My parents' stories about the trials and travails of caring for me as a young child are backed up by a few pictures, but mostly I have to take their word for it. In this day and age of digital cameras and practically unlimited electronic storage space, the trials and travails of raising our son will be much more extensively documented. I see a couple of implications here:

1. Since the costs we're bearing are much easier to document, our son's future uncertainty about how much we really love him falls. The efficiency of the household bargain increases.

2. But well-documented sacrifice is a substitute for future sincerity. Instead of investing in familial social capital I can point to the pictures and go on my merry way. The efficiency of the household bargain is unchanged.

3. "I can't believe you took a picture of that!" Our son spends his teenage years and early adulthood in therapy grappling with his alienation from camera-happy Mom & Dad. The efficiency of the household bargain falls.

And yes, I've been watching my son this afternoon.