Dear Economist,

I live in a strange European Union country where one of our members of parliament declared his wife, who is a housewife, an economic asset in the wealth statement required by parliament. Was he right to do so? Was he fair towards his wife, who is also a human being?

Miroslaw Wasilewski
Warsaw, Poland

Dear Mr Wasilewski,

You raise two questions: the first is whether a housewife can be an economic asset. The answer, surely, is yes. An economic asset is defined by its ability to produce a valuable flow of services. These could be financial (a portfolio of shares) or physical (a car) or both (a house).

Presumably your man in Warsaw derives both financial and non-financial benefits from his wife. Even if she does not earn monetary income, her unpaid labour reduces his financial outgoings - a financial benefit. If she is nice to have around the house then that is a non-financial benefit too.

But is this definition fair to the wife? There is no contradiction between being valuable and being human. So the question is whether this valuable human being should be regarded as property. I don’t see a problem in that. Property is something to be cherished.

Of course, he does not have absolute property rights to dispose of her as he sees fit, but property rights are rarely absolute: you may own your car but that doesn’t mean you can drive through red lights. If this particular asset decides to leave the MP’s portfolio then he can declare the change of status when that happens.

Bear in mind, too, that your MP may also be regarded as an asset in his wife’s portfolio - if she does not view him as a liability.

Questions to: economist@ft.com