Should Trump mock Kim Fatty the 3rd?

Should Trump mock Kim fatty the 3rd?

Eric Ertl

On September 19th, Trump threatened to "totally destroy North Korea" if they seriously threatened the United States. Kim Jong Un, or "Rocket Man" as Trump likes to call him, replied to this threat by calling Trump a "...mentally deranged US dotard". Although this exchange of words may just be threats and insults, it does escalate the tension between the two countries. With North Korea continuing to develop their nuclear program, does North Korea pose a threat to the United States? And if so, should Trump really provoke Kim Jong Un?

Despite the fact that the country of North Korea is severely impoverished due to a combination of a poorly run command economy, economic sanctions, and a flawed food distribution system that leaves millions starving each night, North Korea still poses a threat to the United States. Why? Nuclear weapons. Kim Jong Un throws a lot of time and money into his nuclear weapons program, the opportunity cost being spending less money helping citizens climb out of poverty. Although it is hard to find written poverty statistics due to censorship within the country, images captured from inside North Korea, like the one on the right, tell the whole story. More images of North Korean poverty can be found here. Despite this high level of poverty in Kim's country, he continues to spend money on nuclear weapons in order to stay in power and pretend that his country is relevant in comparison to other powerful countries like the United States. Kim's nuclear program has also caused countries like the United States to impose economic sanctions, that further hurt the country's impoverished economy. Despite this, Kim continues to pour money into his military program, an astonishing 22% of his country's Gross Domestic Product (~10 billion USD), the most of any nation, into the program. About a month ago, North Korea has claimed that they could produce a hydrogen bomb, a bomb roughly 8 times more powerful than the bomb the U.S. dropped on Nagasaki during World War II. With the increase in missile testing North Korea has done over the past year, they might have the ability to send an ICBM (intercontinental ballistic missile) to a target of their choosing. A continued increase of funding into the nuclear program will allow North Korea to eventually be able to mount the warhead (H-Bomb) onto an ICBM and be able to cause massive amounts of damage with it. These factors alone should be enough proof that we should be wary of North Korea because they do pose a threat to countries around the globe.

Although North Korea will mostly likely not use these weapons to harm the United States due to the fact we could completely eradicate their country, that does not mean we should trade insults and threats with North Korea. Trading insults only escalates tensions which may lead North Korea to pull the trigger if they believe their mission is threatened. If North Korea pulled the trigger, the opportunity cost would almost certainly be the end of Kim's leadership. Donald Trump tweeted the following post (see left), essentially saying that he would get rid of Rocket Man and the Foreign Minister of North Korea. Kim responded in a rare direct statement, and stated that Trump would "pay dearly" for the threats, and that North Korea "will consider with seriousness exercising of a corresponding, highest level of hard-line countermeasure in history" (CNN). These are serious threats being thrown around, and should not be taken lightly by either side. Instead of responding to these threats and insults, Trump should ignore them and take serious measures into stopping the North Korean nuclear program.

With North Korea expanding their nuclear program, they pose a legitimate concern to the safety of the United States and other countries around the globe. Trump should not provoke Kim Jong Un because if the guy is crazy enough spend more money on a nuclear program instead of trying to help his country succeed, he might be crazy enough to nuke another country-- especially a country that mocks and insults his every decision.

Works Cited

“10 Facts About Poverty in North Korea.” The Borgen Project, 20 Mar. 2017, borgenproject.org/poverty-in-north-korea/. Accessed 24 Sept. 2017.

Beauchamp, Zack. “Why North Korea's latest threats are far more serious than its typical bluster.” Vox, Vox, 22 Sept. 2017, www.vox.com/world/2017/9/22/16349966/north-korea-trump-dotard. Accessed 24 Sept. 2017.

“Dotard.” Dictionary.com, Dictionary.com, www.dictionary.com/browse/dotard. Accessed 24 Sept. 2017.

“Economy of North Korea.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_North_Korea. Accessed 24 Sept. 2017.

Griffiths, James, and Angela Dewan. “What is a hydrogen bomb and can North Korea deliver one?” CNN, Cable News Network, 22 Sept. 2017, www.cnn.com/2017/09/03/asia/hydrogen-bomb-north-korea-explainer/index.html. Accessed 24 Sept. 2017.

Ramzy, Austin. “Kim Jong-Un Called Trump a ‘Dotard.’ What Does That Even Mean?” The New York Times, The New York Times, 22 Sept. 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/09/22/world/asia/trump-north-korea-dotard.html. Accessed 24 Sept. 2017.

Rubin, Michael, et al. “Why Is North Korea So Poor?” Commentary Magazine, 24 June 2015, www.commentarymagazine.com/foreign-policy/asia/why-is-north-korea-so-poor-communism/. Accessed 24 Sept. 2017.

Styles, Ruth. “The images Kim Jong Un doesn't want you to see.” Daily Mail Online, Associated Newspapers, 9 May 2014, www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2624164/North-Korea-Starving-people-child-labourers-dilapidated-homes-appear-harrowing-new-images-taken-inside-rogue-state.html. Accessed 24 Sept. 2017.

Nike-nomics

Nike-nomics

VInny Rondinelli

Nike has been the dominating sneaker company in the entire world with bringing so many new shoes to the market frequently, keeping sneakerheads and athletes on the edge of their seat to snatch the newest Nike sneaker release. But recently, the hype for Nike has been starting decrease. Nike’s dominance has started to decrease with declining sales and people showing less interest.

In 2016, in more than a decade, did not have the top selling sneaker in the US, which was the Adidas Retro Superstar. This made Nike cut 2% of their labor, about 1,400 people. Adidas products have been making their products more scarce, so it will mean more to sneakerheads that they are more collectible than Nike shoes. This also gives Adidas a shortage in their products since they had a high demand in the last year, with the NMD and Yeezy shoes being the most popular.

People are predicting that Nike will go down hill while Adidas will keep rising in the sneaker community by identifying problems Nike creates. Nike thought of an opportunity cost by releasing workers to save more money for the company, instead of trying to follow trends. They are also giving customers more discounts on shoes people do not care for, which also decreases the company’s value. The marginal cost of this is not making trending type shoes, which will lose some customers. But the marginal benefit of making shoes less scarce can increase sales by lowering prices.

Overall, Nike needs to jump on the wagon by creating more fashionable and casual sneakers rather than sticking to workout and basketball shoes. They need to listen to their customers and try to out beat their main competition right now, Adidas. Nike has not been beat yet, but if they keep up these problems they create, they will fail and be a forgotten company. That is why Nike’s dominance has started to decrease because of their declining sales and people showing less interest towards the company.

Citations

Bain, Marc. “Nike is still the king of the sneaker industry, but even great empires can fall.” Quartz, Quartz, 6 Sept. 2017, qz.com/1067801/nikes-iron-grip-on-the-sneaker-market-is-slipping/. Accessed 18 Sept. 2017.

Brown, V. (2017). NIKE, Inc. (NKE): What are the Technicals Saying? – Economics and money. [online] Economicsandmoney.com. Available at: https://economicsandmoney.com/2017/09/15/nike-inc-nke-what-are-the-technicals-saying-2/ [Accessed 18 Sep. 2017].

Amazon's New Headquarters

Amazon’s New Headquarters

Liza Sjoberg

Amazon recently announced that they were looking to expand their company by adding a second headquarters in North America. By doing this they are estimating an addition of 50,000 jobs and an ultimate net worth of $5.5 billion (Palmer). Cities across North America are placing their bids and trying to bring the headquarters near them. They want this because it will definitely increase employment and create jobs for many individuals in their city. While there are mostly benefits for the city by bringing the new Amazon headquarters to them, some Seattle residents (where the only headquarters are now) do make it know that there are negative impacts to it. Despite any negatives, however, 50,000 jobs is an extremely large number of employment and therefore this will outweigh many other options.

Scarcity of land will definitely impact the future of the Amazon headquarters. Although Amazon desires a metro location, they will have to find a city where there is space to build. Many cities are already very populated and built on top of each other and since Amazon desires 50,000 extra jobs, there needs to be a place in which their headquarters are easily accessible to these individuals. When making their decision they will encounter many trade-offs as they will find perhaps in one city the space to build, however they may have poor transportation alternatives which could defer a labor force for the company. They will have to evaluate the gravity of the opportunity cost of each option to determine where the best location will be. This video actually explains the benefits certain cities have, however this also showcases the opportunity costs for the selected cities that we can infer based off the difference in benefits for each.

Despite the large investment, Amazon realizes that by establishing a new headquarters growth will increase. Their company will be responsible for the 50,000 added jobs in our country. Amazon estimates that the average wage for workers at the new headquarters will be $100,000 so these would greatly increase the economy of a city. With more workers who are being paid substantial amounts,  they are bound to increase their sales and efficiency as a company overall. Amazon wants to continue to increase technology and propose innovative ideas all the while increasing the success of the Amazon company. As seen in the chart below Amazon revenue has skyrocketed in the previous years and is continuing to grow showing the that with the new headquarters this will simply be a helpful aid among their growth.

While many news sites try to predict which city Amazon will choose--ranging from Denver to Washington D.C. to Atlanta--no one truly knows what Amazon will decide. CEO, Jeff Bezos will have to weigh the options according to his own standards to identify the future of the headquarters. The decision will likely take some time as cities across the US continue to bid for the new headquarters, each explaining why their city would be the best option. It is however said “some locations make more sense than others” (McFarland). The opportunities for the company are endless, but so are the options for locations for the new headquarters. Wherever this new investment takes place, however, will bring growth to the company no matter the location.

The negatives however do exist to the situation. Wherever Amazon decides to establish themselves, the local businesses will likely suffer. Additionally for other residents of the city that are not employed by Amazon will most likely face increases in cost of living such as increase in house costs as well as more traffic throughout the city (Lutz). Despite these negative impacts, overall the city will become wealthier and have a greater employment rate. The benefits outweigh the negative impacts and this explains why cities across North America are placing their bids.

Works Cited

cnbc. “Here Are The Cities That Match Amazon's Wish List For Its Second Headquarters | CNBC.” YouTube, YouTube, 8 Sept. 2017, www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuNb4wSmiZI. Accessed 24 Sept. 2017.

Lutz, Ashley. “Cities are in a vicious, $5 billion battle over Amazon's headquarters - here's why they're crazy.” Business Insider, Business Insider, 13 Sept. 2017, www.businessinsider.com/amazon-headquarters-battle-2017-9. Accessed 24 Sept. 2017.

McFarland, Matt. “8 cities fit for Amazon's second headquarters.” CNN, 11 Sept. 2017, www.npr.org/sections/alltechconsidered/2017/09/18/551773552/cities-try-convincing-amazon-they-re-ready-for-its-new-headquarters. Accessed 24 Sept. 2017.

Palmer, Annie. “Why Amazon Is Building a Second Headquarters Worth $5.5 Billion.” TheStreet, TheStreet, 10 Sept. 2017, www.thestreet.com/story/14297542/1/why-amazon-is-building-a-second-u-s-headquarters-worth-5-5-billion.html. Accessed 24 Sept. 2017.

Tulsa, Mayors from Toronto to. “8 cities fit for Amazon's second headquarters.” CNNMoney, Cable News Network, 11 Sept. 2017, money.cnn.com/2017/09/11/technology/amazon-cities/index.html. Accessed 24 Sept. 2017.

The Issue of Catalan Independence

The Issue of Catalan Independence

Morgan Impola

The northeastern region of Catalonia in Spain will be having a referendum on whether to secede from Spain, or stay with their country. The main issue being that the “autonomous” communities within Spain aren’t allowed to secede on their own volition. But with the (remotely) possible independence of the country were to happen, the political, social, and economic landscapes would be dramatically rewritten.

To a layman, the country of Spain is just that: A country. But in technical terms, it’s a region of “autonomous communities”, meaning that the 17 regions (and two cities) that make up what is known as Spain are self governing: From Castile & León all the way to Ceuta. The region known as Catalonia (Or Catalunya in Catalan) is one of the autonomous communities, with the largest city being Barcelona.

The move for independence was called by a referendum in the Catalan parliament, but was deemed illegal by both the high parliament in Madrid and Spanish constitution itself. The main claim for Catalan separatists is something called a call for “self-determination” with is for colonial nations that wish to become free in layman’s terms. But as can be easily seen, Catalonia is itself not a colonial nation, so the claim to self determination falls rather short. Not only is the claim in Spain’s court, but it also violates terms for the European Union. Upon the supposed “independence” Catalonia would have to traverse a myriad of legal and political loopholes that would complicate an already messy (and frankly, impossible endeavour).

But theoretically, the independence of Catalonia would, firstly, have major political and economic repercussions in Spain itself. Catalonia makes up 16-18% of Spain’s GDP, as well as having a fairly large population itself, so economically Catalonia could be stable.

But the social implications would be dramatic. Spain may not take the divorce well, and refuse to trade with Catalonia, or possibly worse. An embargo could ensue. But this is only theoretical.

In short. The independence referendum in Catalonia is not only illegal, but it also would have serious economic implications for Spain itself, but also for other independence movements in the future.

“Autonomous regions in Spain | spain.Info USA.” Spain.info, www.spain.info/en_US/consultas/ciudades-y-pueblos/comunidades-autonomas.html. Accessed 26 Sept. 2017.

Vidal-Folch, Xavier, et al. “EL PAÍS analyzes 10 claims commonly made by separatists to support their cause.” EL PAÍS, Síguenos en Síguenos en Twitter Síguenos en Facebook Síguenos en Twitter Síguenos en Instagram, 26 Sept. 2017, elpais.com/elpais/2017/09/25/inenglish/1506339116_980655.html. Accessed 26 Sept. 2017.

“Why the referendum on Catalan independence is illegal.” The Economist, The Economist Newspaper, 26 Sept. 2017, www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2017/09/economist-explains-17?zid=307&ah=5e80419d1bc9821ebe173f4f0f060a07. Accessed 26 Sept. 2017.

Nike cuts 2% of workforce to improve operations

Written by: Bella Dettlaff

Nike cuts 2% of workforce to improve operations

The American and worldwide corporation that produces and creates the design, development, manufacturing, and worldwide marketing and sales of certain footwear, athletic apparel, equipment and accessories has just recently announced a new form of business structure they are committing to. Nike will be changing many things to their business but among those changes includes the trimming of 2 percent of its workforce globally. At the end of fiscal 2016, Nike had about 70,000 employees. This means that due to the organizational changes, about 1,400 employees are expected to lose their jobs. The demand for a large workforce is not high as Nike is looking to revamp its operations. There’s an opportunity cost to releasing their experienced workforce but Nike is willing to do anything to update their business structure. The new business structure and the cutting of employees will supply more wanted products to customers more efficiently and faster because they are focusing on the “Consumer Direct Offense” which is formulated to be a faster service to fulfill shoppers with customization options.

Due to sportswear having a large competitive market,  Nike is looking to change its way of business. There were many signs that the competitors, mainly Adidas and Under Armour were improving and advancing through their products more than Nike currently was. Adidas is showing revival, advancing in popularity along with the Under Armour having a new expansion into new athletic-gear categories. The image above shows that Nike’s growth rate has slowed down in recent years which is one of the main reasons why they are announcing the improved operations to this favored brand so that it’ll keep its

According to USA today, “In the coming months there will be a big push toward mass customization, new products and more interesting digital experiences within the business,”  Trevor Edwards, president of the Nike brand unit explains. For example, Nike's new Express Lane, which attains products from what the response is from consumers demand will launch in China. This will increase the economic growth and hopefully keep increase Nike’s popularity. The well-known brand, Nike is looking to get their products the customers in the most optimal way. According to a video on bloomberg.org, the Sam Poser, an analyst of research says, “This new structure aligns all of our teams toward our ultimate goal -- to deliver innovation, at speed, through more direct connections.” Showing that the demand to supply ratio will be constant and more customers will be wanting their products.

Works Cited

Hutchinson, Alex, et al. “NIKE Inc.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 2017, www.nytimes.com/topic/company/nike-inc.

Thomas, Lauren. “Nike to Cut about 2% of Its Global Workforce, Announces New Business Structure.” CNBC, CNBC, 2017, www.cnbc.com/2017/06/15/nike-to-cut-approximately-2-percent-of-its-global-workforce.html.

Turner, Nick. “Nike Cutting About 2% of Workforce as It Revamps Operations.” Bloomberg.com, Bloomberg, 2017, www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-06-15/nike-cutting-about-2-of-workforce-as-it-revamps-operations.

Brokeswagen TDI

Brokeswagen TDI

Colin McGowan

In the last few years the German car company Volkswagen has been becoming more and more popular for their line up offering options for every type of driver. One of the types of vehicles Volkswagen offers has a TDI(turbo diesel) engine. This is available in the Volkswagen Golf Passat, and Jetta, that in previous years had been well renowned for the longevity of the powertrain and incredible fuel efficiency without sacrificing any luxuries. These cars that used to be the best option for sporty, reliable, and fuel efficiencient cars now has consumers looking the other direction.

When the TDI option first hit the market, demand was high and over 500,000 models were sold in the first 14 months alone. The turbo and diesel combination allowed for these cars to get an average of 40-50 mpg, while also maintaining reliability for a few hundred thousand miles. This is exactly what fulfilled consumers wants and needs. Once other car companies saw what Volkswagen was accomplishing with turbo engines, they stepped up to compete. Other hybrid or electric cars are able to reach the same fuel efficiency, but never with near the same horsepower and torque. Sounds like it’s too good to be true. The cars may benefit the consumers wallets, but they’ve been putting a dent in the environment.

In order to register a car, every car manufactured after 1993 must go through an emissions test. An emissions test monitors the car’s computer and check the exhaust to make sure the vehicle isn’t polluting the air with too much fuel. The cars have an AFR(air fuel ratio) sensor in the exhaust that signals the engine to use less or more fuel. Volkswagen bypassed the regulations by setting up a system that could tell when the car was being tested for emissions. The car would then run under different settings that followed the emission standards, and return back to normal once the testing had finished. When investigators found this out, the cars were tested under their normal conditions and found to be putting out 30 times higher than the standard.

When the media found out about Volkswagen’s scandal, the company took a huge hit to their diesel department. Not only did Volkswagen take a hit as the demand of their cars plummeted, but the value of the cars dropped to an all time low and Volkswagen was left with a surplus. Volkswagen has set up a recall program that offers buyback or software fix in order to make consumers content with the situation they were put into, but the recall is only making Volkswagen spend more money. To originally make the cars run correctly and not cheat the system would have been a lower opportunity cost than the recalls and sales Volkswagen is paying for and missing out on.

As a car enthusiast myself, I am shocked by the situation at hand. Volkswagen has always been one of my favorite companies but I would have to side against them in this situation. I would sell back the car to the dealership and invest in a different company. My view on Volkswagen has changed and it just makes you wonder what else they could be doing.

Works Cited

Hotten, Russell. "Volkswagen: The Scandal Explained." BBC News. BBC, 10 Dec. 2015. Web.

28 Feb. 2017.

"VW Diesel Saga Hits 3.0-liter TDI Models: Buybacks Happening." Autoweek. N.p., n.d. Web. 28

Feb. 2017.

DACA

DACA

Parker Heidorf

One of the most controversial decisions from the Trump administration in recent weeks has been rescinding (or trying to rescind, maybe?) the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, also known as DACA, program. DACA provides 884,661 undocumented teens and young adults with protection from deportation and economic opportunities. DACA does not offer citizenship, but does give permission for recipients of the program to apply for work permits, bank accounts, credit cards, etc. This would a major mistake, not just because of the continuing anti-immigrant policies of the administration, but also the impact on the economy.

DACA recipients, also called “Dreamers”, have made a significant economic impact since President Obama signed DACA into effect in 2012. According to Newsweek, after being accepted into the program, Dreamers see an average hourly wage increase to $17.46 from $10.26 when undocumented. 72% were in higher education and nearly 80% acquired a driver’s license. According to a study done by the Immigration Policy Center just a year after the program was put in place, 61% of applicants got their first job. 54% opened their first bank account. 38% got their first credit card. And the numbers have only climbed since 2013, with the number of Dreamers rising every year by the hundreds of thousands. The overwhelming majority of Dreamers are productive members of society that we should be building upon, not demolishing and deporting.

If DACA were to be discontinued 6 months from now, all Dreamers could be immediately deported. That would be no small cost, according to Newsweek losing DACA would lose the U.S. a total of $460 billion in GDP over the next decade. Not to mention the 700,000 jobs at risk over that time period as well. For a ‘jobs candidate’, you think it would be a top priority for the President to keep around a program that brings in anywhere from 150,000-400,000 potential workers annually (Year-by-year numbers). However, DACA has been used as a bargaining chip to get the minority Democrats to budge on other stalemates in Congress. It is a misuse of a blooming program that represents what the United States has been built on, immigrants looking for a new start and the hard working middle class consumer.

Works Cited

Berman, Russell. “Trump Reverses His Stand on DACA.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 14 Sept. 2017, www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/09/daca-deal-or-no-deal-trump-democrats-dreamers/539784/. Accessed 18 Sept. 2017.

“DACA Performance Data.” U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, 8 June 2017.

https://www.uscis.gov/sites/default/files/USCIS/Resources/Reports%20and%20Studies/Immigration%20Forms%20Data/All%20Form%20Types/DACA/daca_performancedata_fy2017_qtr2.pdf

Glum, Julia. “These 15 statistics will teach you what you need to know about DACA.” Newsweek, 5 Sept. 2017, www.newsweek.com/dreamers-daca-statistics-trump-deadline-657201. Accessed 18 Sept. 2017.

Gonzales, Roberto G., and Veronica Terriquez. “How DACA is Impacting the Lives of those who are now DACAmented: Preliminary findings from the National UnDACAmented Research Project.” Immigration Policy Center, Aug. 2013.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/31732677/How_DACA_is_Impacting_the_Lives_of_Those_Who_Are_Now_DACAmented.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAIWOWYYGZ2Y53UL3A&Expires=1504900495&Signature=YuEgGGnfqeuP3LUs6g0Q8uX%2BhA8%3D&response-content-disposition=inline%3B%20filename%3DRoberto_G._Gonzales_and_Veronica_Terriqu.pdf

Kopan, Tal. “DACA decision appears to shift to Congress.” CNN, Cable News Network, 5 Sept. 2017, www.cnn.com/2017/09/04/politics/daca-congress-trump-decision/index.html. Accessed 18 Sept. 2017.

i-Phone X

By: Sophia Rahman

Earlier in the month of September, Apple unveiled its newest products including: the iPhone 8, iPhone 8+, the Apple Watch 3, and the hyped iPhone X. To most of the world’s surprise, Apple’s iPhone X will be selling at a hefty price of $999. While many people are hesitant to invest in the new phone, others are preparing to jump on board and buy it once it is released to the public.

According to Pew Research Center, 77% of Americans own a smartphone and that “smartphone adoption has more than doubled since the Center began surveying on this topic in 2011.” That means that Apple will, if not yet, have a shrinking demand if they are unable to tap into a new consumer base. Therefore, the obvious benefits to Apple launching the iPhone X at such a high price is that it enables them to charge a higher cost for future products. Although it may seem illogical to have such a high priced item, it is actually the perfect strategy based on their current business needs. With an already large consumer loyalty base, Apple has been able to create the new iPhone with various intriguing features including face recognition and an all around edge screen that has drawn in more consumers at a high price knowing that it will be at high demand.

             

In addition, Apple’s brand has been able to largely influence their product’s consumers. Traditionally, demand for a product increases as the price of the good decreases yet Apple’s iPhone X proves otherwise. Apple has been able to create a situation where this does not apply. Specifically, with the announcement of the iPhone X, demand has increased despite their high prices. This is a result of the instilled status factor that is associated with owning an Apple product. In the world, there are more than 7 million iPhones in use, with that said, Apple has already dominated a high percentage of smartphone usage (Fortune). Also, Apple is able to leverage their brand as a status symbol to increase demand among America’s youth. A recent study done by investment group, Piper Jaffray, 76% of teenagers in America own an iphone. Therefore, this new product is bound to continue propelling their brand as people strive to own an iPhone.

Furthermore, with the high numbers of iPhone users, Apple’s goal in releasing the iPhone X is to create a new consumer base for their highest end product. They are able to do this by using their clout to motivate fans of their brand to purchase their product. In introducing a high priced product line, they will be able to set up consumers for future products that will also be pricey (Forbes). In addition, because high prices are associated with scarcity consumers will rush to invest in the product.

Lastly, America’s economic freedom allows people to tap into their internal desire to differentiate themselves. Apple, unlike traditional investments, has created the perception that owning an Apple product is the equivalent to investing in one’s own worth. Owning an Apple product has become associated with high class status, therefore owning an iPhone is in a way symbolic of achieving the apex of Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs and being a self-actualized person. America, as a developed country, has allowed people to meet their basic needs enabling them to splurge on their wants including technology like the iPhone X. In this sense, Apple has positioned itself positively when people are considering other ways to invest their money. As said before, many Americans purchase iPhones. Therefore, it can be assumed that many Americans view iPhones as a better opportunity cost and now that the iPhone X has been launched, Americans will be lining up to purchase one, further proving that the iPhone is valued more than another option.

In conclusion, Apple has made a big splash with their announcement. From a business standpoint, it makes perfect sense to give the iPhone such a high price. On the contrary to what critics might say, it’s likely that Apple will succeed by exploiting our natural inclination to better ourselves and fulfill our desires.

Works Cited

Armstrong, Paul. “Apple Introduced iPhone X For One Reason And One Reason Alone.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 13 Sept. 2017.

Reisinger, Don. “Here's How Many iPhones Are Currently Being Used Worldwide.” Apple iPhone Owners: Here's How Many iPhones Are In Use | Fortune.Com, Fortune, 6 Mar. 2017.

Smith, Aaron. “Record shares of Americans now own smartphones, have home broadband.” Pew Research Center, 12 Jan. 2017,

Startlr. “Startlr.” Startlr Tech Blog, 12 Apr. 2017.