Only two more economics lessons to finish up.

I'm working up to greater distances in the pool these days, and got up to 2100 yards today. Economics was on my mind as I was swimming.

The pool was crowded because the little pool was closed. More than three people in a lane is annoying, especially if everyone is swimming different speeds and the slow people don't have good pool etiquette (stop at the wall to let faster swimmers pass; don't push off the wall immediately in front of someone who is faster than you, etc.)

Profit opportunities in the pool are eliminated even more quickly than they are in a perfectly competitive market. The lanes with the fewest people immediately fill up. If there are five people in every lane, and one lane suddenly drops down to two people, new swimmers or swimmers from adjacent lanes will fill in to take advantage of the extra space.

Is this the most efficient pool-filling strategy? No. The pool ends up having slow swimmers in fast lanes and fast swimmers in slow lanes, and everyone ends up annoyed at everyone else in their lane and leaves with a less than maximally satisfying workout.

What if we followed a strategy where everyone got into lanes based on swimmer ability (another pool etiquette rule rarely followed.) Certain lanes could fill with three or four people while other lanes are left open. Eventually the pool fills and everyone is in a lane with swimmers of similar ability. Everyone benefits, even though some people give up the profit opportunity of having a lane to themselves for a few minutes.

What sort of market structure would be analagous to this type pool behavior? A more efficient and equitable one to be sure. One where courtesy and sharing were valued over "first come first serve" mentality. Are such things hopelessly lost in free market?

Sometimes that damn hand needs to be a little less invisible.