AS job losses mount and bailout costs run into the trillions, the social costs of the economic downturn become clearer. The primary question, to be sure, is what can be done to shorten or alleviate these bad times. But there is also a broader set of questions about how this downturn is changing our lives, in ways beyond strict economics.

    All recessions have cultural and social effects, but in major downturns the changes can be profound. The Great Depression, for example, may be regarded as a social and cultural era as well as an economic one. And the current crisis is also likely to enact changes in various areas, from our entertainment habits to our health.

    First, consider entertainment. Many studies have shown that when a job is harder to find or less lucrative, people spend more time on self-improvement and relatively inexpensive amusements. During the Depression of the 1930s, that meant listening to the radio and playing parlor and board games. These stay-at-home tendencies persisted through at least the 1950s.

    In today’s recession, we can also expect to turn to less expensive activities — and maybe to keep those habits for years. They may take the form of greater interest in free content on the Internet and the simple pleasures of a daily walk, instead of expensive vacations and N.B.A. box seats.

    In any recession, the poor suffer the most pain. But in cultural influence, it may well be the rich who lose the most in the current crisis. This downturn is bringing a larger-than-usual decline in consumption by the wealthy.

    The shift has been documented by Jonathan A. Parker and Annette Vissing-Jorgenson, finance professors at Northwestern University, in their recent paper, “Who Bears Aggregate Fluctuations and How? Estimates and Implications for Consumption Inequality.” Of course, people who held much wealth in real estate or stocks have taken heavy losses. But most important, the paper says, the labor incomes of high earners have declined more than in past recessions, as seen in the financial sector.

    Popular culture’s catering to the wealthy may also decline in this downturn. We can expect a shift away from the lionizing of fancy restaurants, for example, and toward more use of public libraries. Such changes tend to occur in downturns, but this time they may be especially pronounced.

    Recessions and depressions, of course, are not good for mental health. But it is less widely known that in the United States and other affluent countries, physical health seems to improve, on average, during a downturn. Sure, it’s stressful to miss a paycheck, but eliminating the stresses of a job may have some beneficial effects. Perhaps more important, people may take fewer car trips, thus lowering the risk of accidents, and spend less on alcohol and tobacco. They also have more time for exercise and sleep, and tend to choose home cooking over fast food.

    In a 2003 paper, “Healthy Living in Hard Times,” Christopher J. Ruhm, an economist at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro, found that the death rate falls as unemployment rises. In the United States, he found, a 1 percent increase in the unemployment rate, on average, decreases the death rate by 0.5 percent.

    David Potts studied the social history of Australia in the 1930s in his 2006 book, “The Myth of the Great Depression.” Australia’s suicide rate spiked in 1930, but overall health improved and death rates declined; after 1930, suicide rates declined as well.

    While he found in interviews that many people reminisced fondly about those depression years, we shouldn’t rush to conclude that depressions are happy times.

    Many of their reports are likely illusory, as documented by the Harvard psychologist Daniel Gilbert in his best-selling book “Stumbling on Happiness.” According to Professor Gilbert, people often have rosy memories of very trying periods, which may include extreme poverty or fighting in a war.

    But this downturn will likely mean a more prudent generation to come. That is implied by the work of two professors, Ulrike Malmendier of the University of California, Berkeley, and Stefan Nagel of the Stanford Business School, in a 2007 paper, “Depression Babies: Do Macroeconomic Experiences Affect Risk-Taking?”

    A generation that grows up in a period of low stock returns is likely to take an unusually cautious approach to investing, even decades later, the paper found. Similarly, a generation that grows up with high inflation will be more cautious about buying bonds decades later.

    IN other words, today’s teenagers stand less chance of making foolish decisions in the stock market down the road. They are likely to forgo some good business opportunities, but also to make fewer mistakes.

    When all is said and done, something terrible has happened in the United States economy, and no one should wish for such an event. But a deeper look at the downturn, and the social changes it is bringing, shows a more complex picture.

    In addition to trying to get out of the recession — our first priority — many of us will be making do with less and relying more on ourselves and our families. The social changes may well be the next big story of this recession.

    Tyler Cowen is a professor of economics at George Mason University.

    當(dāng)事業(yè)人數(shù)上升和救市資金達(dá)到萬億計(jì)的時(shí)候，經(jīng)濟(jì)衰退所造成的社會(huì)損失更加明了了。我們要確定的最主要的問題是我們應(yīng)該做什么來縮短這個(gè)糟糕的時(shí)期或者降低糟糕的程度。但是這里有一些關(guān)于衰退怎樣改變我們的生活的更加廣泛的問題，這種改變超越了嚴(yán)格的經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)規(guī)律。

    所有的衰退都有文化和社會(huì)的影響，但是在大的衰退中這種改變是深刻的。比如說大蕭條時(shí)期，在被認(rèn)為是一個(gè)經(jīng)濟(jì)時(shí)期的同時(shí)也被認(rèn)為是一個(gè)社會(huì)和文化的時(shí)期。并且目前的危機(jī)會(huì)導(dǎo)致在很多領(lǐng)域法律條規(guī)的改變，從我們的娛樂習(xí)慣到我們的健康。

    首先，考慮到娛樂。很多研究表明當(dāng)工作更難找或者不賺錢的時(shí)候，人們花費(fèi)更多的時(shí)間用于自我的提高和花費(fèi)少的消遣。在20世紀(jì)30年代的大蕭條時(shí)期，那意味著聽收音機(jī)和在客廳玩些棋牌類游戲。這種在家里玩的傾向至少持續(xù)到上世紀(jì)50年代。

    在今天的衰退中，我們也希望轉(zhuǎn)向一些花費(fèi)少的活動(dòng)——并且或許會(huì)保留這些習(xí)慣很多年。他們或許會(huì)以對(duì)互聯(lián)網(wǎng)上的免費(fèi)內(nèi)容感興趣和每天散步的不同樂趣為形式，用以取代昂貴的旅行和NBA門票。

    這種轉(zhuǎn)變已經(jīng)被西北大學(xué)的金融學(xué)教授Jonathan A. Parker 和 Annette Vissing-Jorgenson在他們最近的報(bào)告“誰能承受所有的波動(dòng)和怎樣承受這樣的波動(dòng)？消費(fèi)不等式的估計(jì)和推理”證明了。當(dāng)然，在房地產(chǎn)和股票市場(chǎng)投入巨額財(cái)富的人們承受了巨大的損失。但是更為重要的是，這份報(bào)告說，就金融部門來看，高收入階層的勞動(dòng)收入減少的比歷次衰退中減少的更多。

    在這次衰退中流行餐飲文化的消費(fèi)也會(huì)減少。我們可以預(yù)見結(jié)交朋友的場(chǎng)所將會(huì)從在高檔餐館轉(zhuǎn)移到比如說公共圖書館這樣的地方。這樣的改變將會(huì)在衰退中發(fā)生，但是這次這種改變將特別明顯。

    經(jīng)濟(jì)衰退和不景氣對(duì)于心理健康當(dāng)然是不利的。但是這一點(diǎn)在美國和其他富裕國家沒有被普遍認(rèn)識(shí)到，在一般情況下，在衰退中人的身體健康將會(huì)改進(jìn)。當(dāng)然，薪水降低是有壓力的，但是消除這種工作中的壓力會(huì)有一些有一的效果。或許更為重要的是，人們可能更少乘車旅行，因此降低了交通事故的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)，而且人們更少喝酒和抽煙。他們也有更多的時(shí)間進(jìn)行運(yùn)動(dòng)和睡眠，并且更傾向于在家里做飯而不是快餐。

    在2003年的一份報(bào)告“在困難時(shí)期健康的生活”中，Christopher J. Ruhm，北卡羅萊大學(xué)格林斯伯勒分校的一位經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家發(fā)現(xiàn)，當(dāng)失業(yè)率上升的時(shí)候死亡率下降。在美國，他發(fā)現(xiàn)，失業(yè)率平均每增長(zhǎng)1%，死亡率就下降0.5%。

    David Potts在他2006年的一本書《大蕭條的神話》中研究了在20世紀(jì)30年代澳大利亞的社會(huì)歷史。1930年澳大利亞的自殺率升高，但是總體的健康狀況改善而且死亡率下降；1930年以后，自殺率也下降了。

    當(dāng)他在訪談中發(fā)現(xiàn)很多人深情的懷念那個(gè)蕭條的年代，我們當(dāng)然不能草率的得出大蕭條是個(gè)幸福年代這樣的結(jié)論。

    他們的很多報(bào)告很可能是虛幻的，就如同哈佛大學(xué)精神學(xué)家丹尼爾吉爾伯特在他的暢銷書《被幸福絆倒》中證明的那樣。根據(jù)吉爾伯特教授的理論，人們對(duì)于困難時(shí)期往往有著美好的回憶，這些困難時(shí)期可能包括極度的貧窮和戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)。

    但是這次衰退很可能意味著一個(gè)更加節(jié)儉的時(shí)代來臨了。這點(diǎn)被兩位教授的研究所暗示了，北卡羅來納大學(xué)伯克利分校的Ulrike Malmendier 和斯坦福商學(xué)院的Stefan Nagel ，在2007年的一篇論文“蕭條的前身:宏觀經(jīng)濟(jì)的經(jīng)歷影響到風(fēng)險(xiǎn)承擔(dān)了嗎？”

    這篇論文發(fā)現(xiàn)，在股票市場(chǎng)低收益的時(shí)代中成長(zhǎng)起來的一代在投資上會(huì)更加謹(jǐn)慎，就算是10年以后。相似的，在通貨膨脹中成長(zhǎng)起來的一代10年后會(huì)更加謹(jǐn)慎的購買債券。

    換句話說，今天的青少年在將來某個(gè)時(shí)候在股票市場(chǎng)中做出愚蠢決定的機(jī)會(huì)不大。他們可能會(huì)放棄一些好的商機(jī)，但是也會(huì)更少的犯錯(cuò)誤。

    當(dāng)所有的東西都被說了和做了之后，美國經(jīng)濟(jì)中一些很嚴(yán)重的事情已經(jīng)發(fā)生了，并且沒有人想看到這樣一個(gè)事件。但是更深入的看這次衰退和它所帶來的社會(huì)變遷的話，它又呈現(xiàn)一個(gè)更復(fù)雜的畫面。

    在努力擺脫衰退（這是我們首先要做的）的同時(shí)，我們中的大多數(shù)人要用更少的錢生活并且更多的以來自己和我們的家人。這種社會(huì)變革可能成為這次衰退中的下一個(gè)特大新聞。