United States Bid for the 2026 World Cup

Jaeger Hoang

United States Bid for 2026 World Cup

Every four years, 32 nations put forth their best soccer players to compete in the World Cup. The FIFA World Cup is one of, if not the biggest sporting event in the world. Hundreds of thousands of people come from all across the world in order to attend the high class games and to have the once in a lifetime experience in the World Cup atmosphere. With the bids for the 2018 and 2022 World Cups already decided for Russia and Qatar, the United States has proposed to team up with Canada and Mexico for a bid at hosting the 2026 event. If North America does in fact win the bid and end up hosting the World Cup, the country’s economies will be impacted greatly.

The positive externalities of hosting are plentiful. Although the costs of building the stadiums will be very high, the opportunities provided by them will bring in lots qualities that attribute to economic growth. Many jobs will be created through the construction, vendors, and maintenance of the stadiums. Along with job creation the revenue generated by stadiums will also be a huge plus to having to build stadiums. Ticket, memorabilia, and concessions sales will all contribute to that revenue and with the amount of fans attending the games, the stadiums will become profitable in a fairly short amount of time. These sources of income can also continue after the World Cup is over through lending the stadiums to local pro teams and hosting other entertainment events like concerts. According to FIFA host regulations, the countries hosting are required to build stadiums with capacities of 40-80 thousand people. With the capacities so high, more people are bound to attend games and spend money on the main sources of income. Taking the average ticket prices and multiplying it by the capacity of the stadium brings the total ticket sales for one single game to about 36 million. For the 2026 World Cup there will be 80 games and the total ticket sales peaks at a total of over 2 billion (Liu Economics). These numbers are just based on averages so the potential total income from ticket sales alone could be even higher. One of the biggest ways the World Cup can benefit the country’s economy is by stimulating and increasing the amount of customers seen by surrounding businesses. The event, like said before, brings in hundreds of thousands of people from across the world. Their presence in the country will only mean that there are more customers to serve. Hotels and restaurants are two types of businesses that will be affected the most by hosting. Everyone will be looking for a place to stay in the US and they will be looking for the best places to eat in the hosting cities. These businesses will in turn see dramatic increases in income, which will in turn also increase the profits they make. Even after all of the international visitors leave, people will still be going to the host cities to go to the entertainment events at the stadiums, so surrounding businesses will still experience higher rates of traffic than before the stadiums will be built.

Along with the positives, there will also be some major negative externalities for the hosts. In order to build the stadiums, local and national governing bodies will need money to pay all expenses off. This means that citizens of the areas around the stadiums will most likely find an increase in tax rates. Whether it be income tax, property tax, sales tax, or whatever other taxes that are most common in the area, they will all be increased in order to account for construction and maintenance. Disagreements over the taxing will become a problem, but it is necessary in order to make the World Cup a reality in North America. Also the high concentrations of international World Cup fans will make cities much more crowded and busy than before. Traffic will increase both on the roads and walkways resulting in increased times of travel. Citizens will again be affected as their daily routines will need to change in order to accommodate for the dramatic increase in traffic. Finally the cost to run the stadiums is very high. If the cities are to maintain and continue using the stadiums even after the World Cup has concluded, then tax rates and other expenses will remain higher than before. The government will need to cover the deficits caused by the construction and make sure that the stadiums are all paid off, another thing people will disagree on greatly.

Although there are some negative externalities caused by hosting the World Cup, the positives provided for the North American economy are far more in quantity and effectiveness. The increase in taxing and the high traffic that will be brought by the World Cup will be made up for by the jobs that will be created, the dramatic sales increase that will occur, the stimulation of surrounding businesses, and the overall attention that will now be brought to the nations. All in all, the World Cup will be a big positive to the economies of North America.

Works Cited

"Concepts: USA + Canada Joined Bid for 2026 World Cup." FOOTY FAIR. N.p., n.d. Web. 01 May 2017.

Das, Andrew. "U.S., Canada and Mexico Announce Shared Bid for 2026 World Cup." The New York Times. The New York Times, 10 Apr. 2017. Web. 01 May 2017.

Goff, Steven. "Analysis | United States, Canada and Mexico Joint Bid Will Be Favored to Land 2026 World Cup." The Washington Post. WP Company, 09 Apr. 2017. Web. 01 May 2017.

Rosenblatt, Ryan. "What Will the next American World Cup Look Like?" SBNation.com. SBNation.com, 15 July 2014. Web. 01 May 2017.

Sport, PA, Stephan Uersfeld, ESPN Staff, Associated Press, Doug McIntyre, and Tom Marshall. "U.S., Mexico and Canada Officially Launch Bid to Co-host 2026 World Cup." ESPNFC.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 01 May 2017.

Wahl, Grant. "USA's Joint Bid for World Cup '26 Could Come in April." SI.com. Sports Illustrated, 25 Mar. 2017. Web. 01 May 2017.

Miller Park

Nathan Burke

In order for our communities to have great wealth and fame, we absolutely need professional sporting events. We also need new, fashionable arenas for those events to take place in. Of course the marginal cost will be large over time, it will still be worth it because of the marginal benefits. New professional sporting arenas will bring great wealth to the community economically and will benefit almost everyone in the community. For example, Miller Park added nearly $300 million to the local economy annually (Journal Sentinel). Now that the Brewers are getting better as a team, more and more people will purchase tickets for their games and their revenue will continue to raise. Just look at what that small amount does for the economy in such little time. This park created a positive externality for mostly everyone around it.

Although there are a lot of positives, there are still some negative externalities. For example, because so many people go to the games at Miller Park, there is an unsteady flow of traffic and it creates another couple rush hours on the highway on the days that the Brewers play at home. Miller Park was an opportunity cost that worked out for the better. The community really needed this and it helped out local businesses and most people, if not everyone.

The park is also used for certain events, like concerts, which bring in people from all over Wisconsin and other states near us. Miller park is a public good that has private goods within it. It’s sort of like a mall. You can walk around the mall without spending a dime, because it was paid for by the community, but the stores within the mall are privately owned, therefore they are private goods. The same goes for Miller park, you pay a small fee to get in, but you don’t have to pay the full price of the park (public good). On the other hand, if you buy something within the park, it’s yours to keep (private good). This gives people the pleasure to go out and have fun.

Overall, communities should raise taxes to help pay for professional sporting arenas. This will help the community to become more wealthy and it will also help create jobs. There is such a little opportunity cost that leads to marginal benefits. In the long run, raising taxes will create wealth in our communities.

Sources

Behm, Don. "Distant Brewers' fans have $263 million annual impact." IIS7. Journal Sentinel, n.d. Web. 29 May 2017.

Kirchen, Rich. "Miller Park adds $300M to local economy: MLB study." Bizjournals.com. Milwaukee Business Journal, 13 Mar. 2013. Web. 25 May 2017.

Staff, BizTimes. "Study validates economic impact of Miller Park." BizTimes Media Milwaukee. BizTimes Media Milwaukee, 20 Aug. 2015. Web. 29 May 2017.

Zoey Ramey
Blog Post

May 25,  2016

Take a Vacation and Help the Economy

Does taking a vacation help the economy?  Most employees don’t use their vacation time. Employees aren’t using the time they earned by working. Americans left an average of 3.2 paid time off days unused in 2013, totaling 429 million unused days for U.S. workers. If employees used their vacation time the economy would benefit from more than $160 billion in total business sales and $21 billion in tax revenues, spending that would support 1.2 million jobs.  If employees used even an extra day of their vacation time the company would have more total revenue and raise the GDP.The total contribution of travel and tourism was $7.61 trillion. It has also been shown that more employees use vacation time when consumer confidence increases. People won’t travel as much as they used to. The decline in vacations started in the 2000’s.  Gas averages are $2.36/gallon which is down from $3.80/gallon last year. 3-diamond hotel's average $142/night decreased down from $161/night last year.  Taking a vacation also increases revenue for economies that thrive on tourist bringing in a portion of revenue.

Travel cost has increased which can affect the opportunity cost of travel by having substitute activities like staying home.  Consumers not using their vacation time can affect the GDP of towns and countries that depend on the revenue of tourist. Consumers can be scared of traveling because of negative externalities. Some would include phobias and dangerous weather like heights, hurricanes, and earthquakes. 6.5% of the population have a fear of traveling. Most of the time though consumers that are not unemployed just want to cash in their vacation time and get a check. What they don’t know is that hurts them and the economy more than they know. The companies have to adjust and account the loss in their spending budget. If the consumers use their vacation time the company would not lose money and be able to reinvest into the economy leading to an overall improvement.

Work Cited

"Economics Online." Negative externalities. N.p., n.d. Web. 29 May 2017.

DePillis, Lydia. "Lots of Americans fear flying. But not because of plane crashes." The Washington Post. WP Company, 31 Dec. 2014. Web. 29 May 2017.

Seaney, Rick, Ceo Of, Href, Http, WWW.FARECOMPARE, Target, External, and Farecompare. "Fear of Flying? Some Good Things to Know." ABC News. ABC News Network, 07 Oct. 2013. Web. 29 May 2017.

Mohn, Tanya. "Take A Vacation: It's Good For Productivity And The Economy, According To A New Study." Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 01 Mar. 2014. Web. 29 May 2017.

Thompson, Derek. "The Case for Vacation: Why Science Says Breaks Are Good for Productivity." The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 06 Aug. 2012. Web. 29 May 2017.

The School Years Impact on the Economy

Jaida Gahan

B2- Econ

Reuter

5/30/17

The School Years Impact on the Economy

Parents are year round money machines. From the time they find out they’re pregnant, til the time they die they will always be spending money. Majority of the money spent is spent from birth till the age of 18. Parents are constantly spending money which helps the economy. In winter they need to buy the clothes and supplies needed for warmth. In Spring and Summer kids need cooler clothes. Lastly, fall, is back to school time.

During the first couple months of school the economy is greatly impacted. In 2016 alone $75.8 Billion was spent on school supplies. This total is broken down into four groups: apparel, electronics, shoes and school supplies. Now most people would think that schools supplies would have the highest amount but this isn’t true, clothing has the highest. In 2016, $9.54 Billion was spent on clothing, in an average household parents spend $235.39 on clothes for their children. The next highest group is electronics total is $8.27 Billion, parents spend around $204.05 on electronics. The third highest group is shoes, total spent is $5.12 Billion and parents spend around $126.35. Lastly, and somewhat shocking is school supplies, total $4.37 Billion is spent and parents spend around $107.36. This is somewhat shocking but also makes sense.

Clothes, shoes and electronics all cost lots of money but lots of people buy school supplies and lots of them. While at the store I’ve seen families with carts filled to the top with school supplies. On the other hand this does make sense because when the school year comes around prices do go down and more sales are offered. When school shopping there is a substitution effect. Parents know they have to spend a lot of money on each of the groups so when it comes to certain supplies parents buy the cheaper item rather than the more expensive ones. Many people like to go shopping as soon as their children get their supply lists because there comes a time when there is a scarcity for many goods. There is a high demand for the same item so people want to get their supplies quick. If people wait too long there will be a shortage of goods re so people are forced to buy more expensive items because the cheaper ones are gone. Walmart, Target and Amazon are most impacted by the transition into the school year. More workers are needed because the stores are so chaotic which also impacts the economy because these companies have to pay their workers. Workers are need on all ends: manufacturing, shipping, in store- stocking, and customer services.

The last couple years there's been lots of budget cuts for schools. This is supposed to help the economy. When this occurs many people are laid off because schools don’t have enough money to pay for all the teachers. Classroom sizes become larger and the supplies supplied by the school are often use and supplies become scarce. WHen this happens parents have to go to the store and buy more supplies for their kids. This occurs a lot, many people have to go back and get more supplies midway through the year because things are lost or ran out of. The school year greatly impacts the economy and the people in the United States.

White, Martha C. "Back-to-School Costs Soar, Burdening the Poor." NBCNews.com. NBCUniversal News Group, 10 Aug. 2014. Web. 30 May 2017.

Kline, Daniel B. "Back-to-School Shopping Growth Suggests Improved Economy." The Motley Fool. The Motley Fool, 01 Jan. 1970. Web. 30 May 2017.

Lowering the Price of College

Chanse Steinert

Mr. Reuter

Econ

B2

Lowering the Price of College

With many of us graduating high school, we take into consideration our post high school plans; many of those plans involve picking out and attending a college in the fall. Most of the time people don’t know how they will pay back or how long it will take to pay back the debt they owe. A lot of times students find themselves asking why isn’t college free, and the answer is the government can’t afford it, so that would leave the taxpayers.

The average student loans are around 33,000$, that is a ton of money, but paying 347.74$ a month with an interest rate of 6%, it can be payed off in 10 years and 9 months. That is a very long time, but the cost does vary depending on what the major is. If student textbooks weren’t so much money, we could all save a lot. Spending about 400-500 hundred dollars on a textbook many will only use once or twice is crazy. College is very important for many people, but the cost is just way too much money for some. College should not be free by any means, but it should be cheaper than what it is, the cure for cancer could be in the mind of someone who can’t afford the costs of college, that sounds dumb but sadly it is a very true fact.

Many schools spend too much money on administration and not enough on academics, the cost of college education generally always rises faster than inflation.

With the college rates going up more and more people won’t be able to afford to go to college. Yes scholarships are around, but they only go so far in one’s career. Let’s say you wanted to do something in the medical field, you’d be in school for 11 years; the debt from those 11 years would be about 166,750 dollars of debt, in the real world no one can afford that. No matter how hard anyone tries, no one can afford that much money. Med students start making money after their internship of 3 years. So many people have the knowledge of Becoming a doctor, but it is very expensive and not many have the money for it right away.

Many people who start college, pick the career they can afford. We need people for everything, but what’s the  Point of doing something you're not in love with because you simply can't afford it. This is why college prices need to be lowered, College should not be free by any means but it does need to be cheaper for those who can't afford it.

Adoption

Rachel Ward

Many People know about the animals that surround our lives with love. However many people do not know the costs involved with our furry friends. Many cost may occur as you bring a new family member into your life. This means many people may abandon or give up their pets.

Throughout history many pets have lived with us throughout our lives with helping us to survive or becoming longtime companions. Such of these companions have lived with Royalty,Presidents, and people like you and me. However many costs have occurred of owning pets live vets bills and adoption costs.

Some of these such costs can be the Veterinary check-up, spaying or neutering, and including many of the vaccines involved to protect our pets(Adoption Fee). These costs can can be up to 425-800 dollars, though many rescue places would not ask this fee.(Adoption Fee). There is still more costs to include though with other basic necessities like food and water.

   According to The site Money under 30 the 1rst year costs of a dog could well be up to 1,270, meaning that every year you own a pet you may spend more than a thousand dollars on a pet.Sadly , many of the costs of theses animals is focused on to animal shelters and rescue centers with about 170 animals in a shelter. The cost of these animals could well be up 348,160 dollar in cost of these animals.

Hower later in life many pets may become sick or injured requiring visits to the vet. Thus causing more and more costs of a pet. The basic costs of a vet can be 45-55 dollars, however some vet visits could cost thousands of dollars for a pet owner. Some of these additional costs may be Genetic screening, dental cleaning, allergy testing and surgery. Meaning it’s important to find out whether or not you want a pet.

Even with these costs ,44% of the U.S population still own pets, meaning that many people find the reward of owning a pet higher than the cost of owning one. Due to this fact we state that the pet owners find the marginal cost of a pet less than having a pet

Even with all these costs of pets, there is one benefit, with 60.59 billion in expenditures spent in 2015(LearnVest). Showing that owning a pet may improve the economy and help America in the long run.

Throughout history many animals have become our companions like dog,cats,  bird, and even snakes! And as stated above many costs are involved in owning a companion.With costs like vaccines, vet visits and surgeries for our furry family. Still many people want to own pets thus meaning they find the reward of a pet far higher than costs of owning one.

Works Cited

1. SmartAsset. "America's Pets By the Numbers: How Much We Spend." LearnVest - Financial Planning Services and Personal Finance News. N.p., 15 Feb. 2016. Web. 31 May 201
2. Allen., Meredith, Mr Abe Lincoln, Harry Poooter, Hippo Handler, The Hippo Handler, Debbie, Vetted In Colorado, John, Deplorable_Pam, DuckTheGreat, and Dakota. "The Annual Vet Visit Cost: What to Expect." PetCareRx. N.p., 13 Aug. 2013. Web. 31 May 2017.
3. "Calculating Shelter Capacity." Koret Shelter Medicine. N.p., n.d. Web. 31 May 2017.
4. "What Is Included In An Adoption Fee?" Petfinder. N.p., n.d. Web. 31 May 2017.

College Towns are Makin' Money

Hayley Nangle

Economics

05/30/17

Reuter

College Towns Are Makin’ Money

Upon graduating high school, many young people choose to attend a college or university that fall. Not everyone, of course, but many. And although college tuition and board and all of that fun stuff restricts a student’s tuition budget, it’s nice to know that not all of the money spent goes to only to the college, but to the college town as well. Thus, the money spent by students and visitors in college towns greatly benefits the local economy and helps allow it to grow and prosper.

One surprising finding, for instance, is that more university-related spending (products, services, etc.) actually creates far more jobs off of campus than it does on campus. According to Jeffrey Humphreys from the Georgia Trend, “on average, for each on-campus job there are 1.4 off-campus jobs. [Which] really [is] not too surprising. After all, the private sector businesses operating in “college towns” are by far the biggest recipients of institution-related spending. Without exception, each institution is an economic linchpin of its host community” (Humphreys). And for those who don’t know what “linchpin” means, it’s just a person or thing vital to an enterprise or organization.

Anway, an even more impressive fact about these college towns is that the schools really demonstrate their economic worth during a recession. Mainly that’s because of the relatively steady demand for higher education, even when the economy isn’t doing so hot. Of course economic activity associated with colleges and universities is not “recession proof” by any means, although it does appear to be recession resistant to some degree. For instance, declines in college-related spending tends to be less than the overall economy, but increases are also less conspicuous. Thus, college towns have a tendency to hold relative stability inside and outside of recessions, also making them more economically stable than other towns.

But the interesting facts don’t stop there! They’ve got some impressive figures, too! College towns can also have statewide economic impacts, like how many of the state’s research universities, regional universities, or larger state colleges receive a decent amount of exposure in the media. On the contrary, however, economic impacts by many state universities and colleges, as well as two-year colleges, receive far less attention. This is especially applicable to colleges and universities not located in a major metropolitan area. Despite this, many of those smaller institutions have large economic impacts relative to the size of their local communities. As for the figures mentioned earlier, Jeffrey Humphreys provided some impressive numbers from example college and university towns of their profits:

“Georgia College and State University, Milledge-ville: The economic impact is $172 million; the employment impact is 1,855 jobs, with 714 on campus and 1,141 off-campus.

Georgia Southwestern State University, Americus: An economic impact of nearly $78 million and 793 jobs.

North Georgia College and State University, Dahlonega: An economic impact of $146 million. There are 472 on-campus jobs and 971 off-campus jobs that exist due to institution-related spending, creating a combined employment impact of 1,443 jobs.

Abraham Baldwin Agricultural College, Tifton: The total employment impact on Tifton’s economy is 1,005 jobs. That includes 373 on-campus jobs and 632 off-campus jobs. The institution’s economic impact on regional output or sales is $81 million.

Dalton State College: The economic impact is $88 million. The employment impact is 949 jobs, including 338 jobs on the campus and 611 off campus.

Middle Georgia College, Cochran: The college supports 838 jobs in Cochran’s regional economy; the institution’s economic impact exceeds $85 million” (Humphreys).

Looking back at this information, one can determine that there is far more full employment in these college towns than unemployment, regardless of whether an individual is a student or local. Furthermore, there seasonal unemployment is relatively brief, as it’s mainly during the student's breaks. If you are one who prefers a visual example, however, Brooklyn Tech provided this little beauty:

(“Made”).

Works Cited

Humphreys, Jeffrey. "College Towns Reap Benefits." Georgia Trend.

georgiatrend.com/August-2008/College-Towns-Reap-Benefits/.

"'Made in NY" Media Center Announced." Wpengine. Brooklyn Tech Triangle.

brooklyntechtriangle.com/author/wpengine/page/2/.

Are Big Name Pizza Companies Hurting Small Pizza Stores?

Joe Marz

Mr. Reuter

Economics

8 May 2017

Are Big Name Pizza Companies Hurting Independent Pizza Stores?

Without question, pizza is one of the most popular foods that exists today. It comes as no surprise, then, that the top pizza chains consistently bring in a great deal of revenue year to year. While these pizza chains flourish, however, they leave other, lesser known pizza suppliers in the dust. Due to these top name pizza companies bringing in so much in the way of earnings and continuously creating so many improvements in technology, local, independent pizza companies are starting to suffer.

There is no denying that pizza chains bring in a large amount of money each year. As demonstrated by the chart above -- delineating the sales of the 100 best selling pizza companies along with the individual stores of each company that bring in the most money -- the top 5 pizza producers -- all of which are big name brands -- make inconceivable amounts of money each year, with the top 4 companies all ending 2016 with their sales numbers in the billions. These companies are showing no signs of slowing down either. As this video explains, Domino’s has seen monumental increases in stock value, and sales projections only foreshadow continuous growth for the company. While this is certainly impressive, Domino’s is not the only company looking at improvements in its future.  According to a recent sales report on the first sales quarter of 2017, Papa John’s has seen a large 60% increase in digital sales from its previous sales quarter. Furthermore, despite selling better than any other pizza chain in 2017, Pizza Hut’s mother company -- Yum! Brands Inc. -- plans to make a $130 million investment in its pizza brand sometime later this year -- due to Pizza Hut seeing a slight decline in economic growth this past year.

As these big name pizza companies continue to flourish, their success has an unfortunate negative externality on local and independent companies. According to Wall Street Journal, due to the ability of these pizza chains to improve their brands and keep up with the latest and greatest technology, smaller, lesser-known pizza companies are starting to see their sales suffer. When a large-scale pizza company has the ability to keep up to date on its internet sales like Papa John’s, or has the ability to invest hundreds of millions of dollars into its brand without making a dent like Yum! Brands Inc. with Pizza Hut, it becomes hard for these smaller names to compete. While top pizza chains are constantly correcting any errors in their companies and are constantly refining their brand through advertisements and internal improvements, smaller pizza stores that only locals would know can’t keep up the pace-- as they accumulate nowhere near the amount of money that pizza chains like Pizza Hut or Domino’s make on a yearly basis to have such regular refinements or improvements, causing these companies to fall behind as a result. Additionally, the ease of access to big name pizza companies puts further stress on smaller pizza stores. While independent companies may taste more authentic and may have the ability to provide that home-town feel, when given a faster and generally cheaper option in top name pizza companies, most consumers will gladly take the opportunity cost of losing that ambiance that smaller pizza places provide for a more efficient alternative. As a result of losing customers on both of these fronts, smaller pizza companies deteriorate more with each passing day.

Despite how much we all may love our Papa John’s or our Little Caesar's, the success of these companies unfortunately makes other, lesser-known companies pay the price. While there’s no doubt that such pizza stores earned their success, it’s hard not to feel pity for the independent companies that are experiencing difficulties on their behalf-- with one brand’s success meaning another’s failure.

Works Cited

Jargon, Julie. "Big Pizza Chains Use Web Ordering To Slice Out Bigger Market Share." The Wall Street Journal. Dow Jones & Company, n.d. Web. 08 May 2017.

Jonathan Maze | May 03, 2017. "Yum to invest $130M in Pizza Hut." Nation's Restaurant News. N.p., 04 May 2017. Web. 08 May 2017.

"New York Attorney General Doesn't Like Pizza." Economics21. N.p., 25 May 2016. Web. 08 May 2017.

"Papa is pleased: Papa John's digital sales hit 60%." Www.pizzamarketplace.com. N.p., 03 May 2017. Web. 08 May 2017.

"Pizza Today's 2016 Top 100 Pizza Companies." Pizza Today. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 May 2017.