The ECO100 case for pissing in the sink

The following content is purely satirical and entirely fictional.

Dear editors,

My hygienic routine was rudely disturbed this morning when fellow Grousbeck Hall resident Sally Clark ’29 walked in and screamed:

“Oh my god, oh my god, what the fuck are you doing Sam?!”

The question seemed rhetorical; under the assumption that Sally was of sound mind and not sensorily impaired, it would have been perfectly clear what I was doing, which she confirmed with her next query,

“Why are you pissing in the sink!?!”

That question gave me pause. I suppose I had never thought about why I piss in the sink –– it’s just something that I do. I was formulating a response when she disturbed my train of thought with another vocal expulsion,

“Oh my god, is that why it always smells like crap in here?”

This was a silly question and, frankly, beneath Sally’s intelligence. I told her so and explained that, if it smelled like urine, I was almost certainly the culprit, but if it smelled like feces, that was probably another’s work. 

At this, Sally stormed out of the restroom, before I had a chance to answer her one good question! She subsequently blocked me on both Instagram and LinkedIn, so I will publish my explanation here so that she might see it and satisfy her curiosity.

The ECO100 case for pissing in the sink:

The personal benefits of pissing in the sink are obvious. It is three meters closer than the toilet from the bathroom door and is also where I brush my teeth. By urinating in the sink, I save at least 14 seconds of walking every single morning. Furthermore, the toilet stalls are often occupied, acting as a bottleneck; in those cases, shunning a sink tinkle could cost nearly five minutes. 

However, Sally’s objections did not center around denial of the personal benefit of sink urination. While poorly phrased, her comment on smell has some truth; my sink pissing does incur a social marginal cost via the negative production externality of pee splashing all over the counter and faucet handle.

However, anyone who has taken elementary microeconomics knows that actors do not compensate for social marginal cost themselves. Rather, a regulatory body must take action to shift the equilibrium to the desired point. The clear solution here is a Pigouvian tax on my atypical urination. 

Sally attempted to administer such a tax, alienating me from all of my friends by labeling me the “Grousbeck sink pisser” on Fizz. However, she failed to account for my inelastic demand for social approval and the fact that I do not understand feelings.

Sally has also threatened to report me to the Department of Public Safety, but I have built up a substantial repository of videos showing me urinating in a toilet, which I can use as an alibi in the case of an investigation. In effect, I have made myself entirely tax-exempt. 

Unfortunately for Sally and the rest of Grousbeck hall, I see no possible respite in my urinary habits unless the University takes action to shift the cost/benefit equilibrium squarely into the toilet. Perhaps they could put the stalls where the sinks are, or find some way to facilitate brushing teeth in the toilet. Until then, I am afraid that my sink pissing is inevitable.

On a positive note, this case is a demonstration that by remaining critical of even our longest-held habits, we gain the highest fulfillment in consciously living a logical, efficient life. Thank you, Sally, and thank you to the editors of The Daily PrintsAnything who support and publicize my work. 

Sincerely,

Samuel Miller

Nathaniel Voss is an assistant Humor editor who would rather not be deemed a ‘supporter’ of Samuel’s work. He can be reached at nathanielvoss[at]dailyprincetonian.com.