Shake n Stomp

It is well known to economists that currency comes about so as to improve trade. To simplify here is how it works:

To trade good A for good B the owner of each must want what the other has - this is called double coincidence of wants. If I want your pie but you don't want my meat then trade cannot occur.

To solve this currency occurs so that if I want your pie I can buy it with cash. And you can spend the money on whatever you want. That's a gross simplification, but hopefully makes sense.

When it comes to sex however we rely on the occurance of a double coincidence of wants. We have to find someone who not only has what we want (ie. their hot sexy body) but is also willing to trade it for what we have (our body). This creates a massive under supply of sex in the market, this is market inefficiancy as demand is never met!

So the solution, surely, is to pay for sex. In this way we trade it like any other good or service. The prices will adjust and markets will clear (assuming no barriers to entry etc.) And all the people who would be having sex anyway can still trade without money. By insisting that sex must be free we only remove a large amount of trade, and therefore utility gains, from the economy.

Not only does this mean that people can have as much sex as they can afford. It also means that people can derive income to spend on whatever they want. So although you could spend the money you made from having sex on having sex with someone else, you could also spend it on, say, a nice vase.

As well as a lucrative career for the underqualified there is a potentially huge market in part time prostitution as a supplementary income for say housewives and college students, who don't have the time for full time jobs. Furthermore, assuming high demand from the male demographic this could really help close the pay gap.

I think you will all agree with me that this is a much more economically efficient way of exchanging bodily fluids.