Supply // Demand

Supply // Demand

Noah Anselm Zach

Let’s go back to 1993. Frosted tips, pizza bagels, and Metallica. That’s the spirit link to the time where Second Edition of Dungeons and Dragons was the only game on the block; we calculated THAC0, rolled 3d6 down the line, and memorized spells using the vancian magic system. Magic Gathering hit the scene and sold like gangbusters. A game with such principles behind it had never been encountered before. The trading card game. On the scale of roulette to go, it occupies the space directly in the middle. A game where you have a different hand every time like poker, which allows the game to be strategically interesting, and also a game like chess, where you and your opponent each have limited resources and strategies vary from trading resources with your opponent and playing to an endgame, like grandmaster Karpov, who plays boring moves until you go to sleep hitherto Karpov waking you up to notify you that you’ve lost to time, or focusing on winning as quickly as possible, like an aggressive Paul Morphy with his wild and crazy tactics. The changes in style are part of what makes the game compelling. Because it’s a trading card game, you can play whatever cards you want, and develop your own style as a player, for example, if I hear Corey Burkhart is at an event, I know he is playing a slow control deck with Cryptic Command and Gurmag Angler, and Patrick Sullivan never leaves home without his Goblin Guides. The great part about magic, or MTG for short, is that it’s still a card game, so the stochastic part forces players to stay on their toes, and additionally, there isn’t perfect information, so bluffing tricks is something that can also occur, and that’s 2 additional skills to be flexed, one on each side of the goblin game But that trading card element is the core of the game. You can choose what cards you put in your deck, and because it’s a trading card game, there is of course a secondary market for cardboard.

Wizards of the Coast makes MTG. They design the game, and control the supply. There has to be some scarcity, otherwise the product wouldn’t be lucrative; this isn’t a charity. At the same time, they have to make product to sell. Cards can get pretty expensive; old cards with shorter print runs can have massively inflated prices, partially due to the reserved list, which is a can of beans to be opened at a different time, but also because there just aren’t as many cards out there to support a constantly growing player base, especially in an age with superhero movies and ren-faire commercial advertisements, not to mention a well educated generation, where it is becoming more cool to be nerdy. Strictly speaking, they’re a monopoly, but that is only a part of the issue, because WOTC is a benevolent despot. Every so often, they have reprint sets to bring back the supply on those high value cards. Rishadan Port used to run you $120, but after a reprint in Masters 25, you can get one for $15. Port was originally printed 19 years ago, and because of the formats that the card is legal in, there really isn’t that much demand for the card, and because the product is a luxury good, it’s really demand inelastic; i.e. the demand isn’t really going to undergo a giant growth if the supply increases. Thus, the price change is so severe. On the other side of the coin, Lightning Bolt has been reprinted a billion times, and it’s never going to fall below a couple dollars because people will always need more Bolts because of its ubiquity in every format where it is legal. Everyone needs a Bolt.

This brings us to the centerpiece of tonight’s meal, Ultimate Masters, a product that has driven the community to ends. Wizards has apparently pulled out all the stops with this reprint set, shattering all expectations by hitting pretty much every card on the list of cards that need reprinting. This is typically the point where I’d run off a list of every Tarmogoyf and Snapcaster Mage-like card they reprinted, but every card, at every rarity, is pretty much a hit. From headliners like Karn and Cavern of Souls, down to the not-so-lowly commons such as fan-favorite Basking Rootwalla, and Mad Prophet, which is coincidentally the name of my latest rap album. On top of all of this, in every box there will be what is called an Ultimate Box Topper, a foil version of one of 40 chase cards in the set with extended artwork. Looking at a couple, they are indeed impressive, especially with the new artwork that some of the reprinted cards have been given. The friction comes at the price of the product. As of December 12th, you can get your box of Ultimate Masters for $275. The sticker shock did ruffle some feathers in the community. The Professor, at Tolarian Community College, a popular Magic-related Youtube channel, delivered the Wrath of God at the product’s price point in his podcast, Dies to Removal, given that it is a long-standing joke that his actual job as an adjunct at a community college is a source of general irritation at the instability in the field and the lack of adequate pay that comes with a job that generally requires a master's degree. That establishes his average joe-ness, with the means of a layman, and so comes the relatability. And his claims are well founded; you shouldn’t need that masters in economics to play a game; but, his degree is in English, so the Professor is more used to dealing with letters than numbers. After talking to people around the local game store, players are falling on both sides of the coin. On one hand, $275 for a pile of cardboard used for a children’s card game seems at the very least, a little bit silly, but on the other, it’s a luxury good, the demand of which is relatively inelastic. People are just going to buy the product no matter how much it costs, especially given that this particular product is very desirable, not to mention that the Ultimate Box Toppers essentially mean that there’s a 50 dollar bill stapled to every box.

Additionally, you don’t need to buy a box of Ultimate Masters to benefit from the reprint mania. If you just need specific cards for your deck, you can dismiss all worries by just buying them on the secondary market at capsized prices because of the increase in supply. The arcane denial for that claim is that the cards that weren’t reprinted spike in price due to increased demand for older formats, which is reasonable; cards like mox opal and manamorphose shot up after the full release of the list of cards in the set, but it isn’t logistically possible to reprint everything at once; there’s only a limited amount of space in the set. Creeping Tar Pit is down 60%, Bridge from Below is down 75%, and although prices will balance after the market returns to stasis, for your Gifts Given this Christmas season, you can get the 4 copies of the cards you need on the cheap.

Works Cited

Tcgplayer.com, www.tcgplayer.com/.

“The Aftermath of Ultimate Masters | Article by Jim Casale.” CoolStuffInc.com, www.coolstuffinc.com/a/jimcasale-12112018-the-aftermath-of-ultimate-masters.

College, Tolarian Community. “Dies To Removal Episode 2: Ultimate Masters Dies To Finance - A Magic: The Gathering Video Podcast.” YouTube, YouTube, 27 Nov. 2018, www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=pvdFempzvV0.

“How Much Is Ultimate Masters Helping Modern Prices?” S, www.mtggoldfish.com/articles/how-much-is-ultimate-masters-helping-modern-prices.
“MTGStocks.com.” MTGStocks, www.mtgstocks.com/news.

Is Attending a Four Year University Worth it?

Is Attending a Four Year University Worth It?
By TJ Chadwick

As the cost of attending a four year university continuously grows over time, and the educational quality of two year colleges improves, attending a two year college is becoming a much more appealing option to potential students. WIth around 20 million students attending college, around 13 million of those students attend private or public four year universities, while that other 7 million attend two year colleges (nces.ed.gov).

Tuition can be vastly different depending on what type of college a student is looking to attend. For four year universities, yearly tuition, as of 2018, can range from $34,740 for private universities, and $25, 620 and $9,970 for out of state and in-state tuition respectively, while two year colleges range from $14, 587 for a private college, and $3,570 for a public college. As the cost of higher education increases by 2.4% for private schools, and 3.2% for public school, students may start looking more towards attending a two year college over a four year university, as the cost of yearly tuition is already vastly lower to attend a two year college (Studentdebtrelief.us).

To go along with the differences in the yearly tuition of four year and two year schools, there is also the debt of student loans that comes into play. In 2018, the total amount of debt from student loans in the United States was upwards of 1.5 trillion, around 7% of the U.S. national debt. Since 2010-11, the amount of money given out by the government to families to pay for college has begun to go down, although not for great reasons. The price of attending college is still going up, but the enrollment in colleges is beginning to go down (Studentdebtrelief.us). Some students are so focused on attending a four year university that they overlook the cheaper option of a two year school, even though its quality of education is extremely high. Is it really smarter to attend a four year university and pay thousands of more dollars per year than attending a two year university with a very small difference in education, or end up with thousands more in debt?


https://bigfuture.collegeboard.org/pay-for-college/college-costs/college-costs-faqs
http://www.tsc.edu/index.php/new-students/advantages-of-attending-a-community-college.html
https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=372
https://www.studentdebtrelief.us/news/average-cost-of-college-2018/
https://www.studentdebtrelief.us/student-loans/student-debt-statistics/

The Economic Impact of Sexism in Hockey

The economic impact of sexism in hockey
Yanna Glaspy

A popular debate in the sports world is the discussion of the pay difference between female and male athletes. But just how significant is this gap? Are male athletes really that much better that they deserve a higher salary because of their gender?
In 2017, Amanda Kessel was the highest paid NWHL skater, with a one-year, $26,000 contract. In the 2016-17 season, she totaled 24 points in 12 games, averaging 2 points per game. Kessel has won a medal at every international tournament she's competed in; Silver in Sochi, Gold in 2013 IIHF Women's World championship, Silver in 2012 IIHF Women's World championship, and Gold at the 2011 and 2012 Four Nations Cup (“Content Search: Kessel).
In 2017, Shea Weber was the highest paid NHL player (in salary alone, not including endorsements), with a one-year, $14 million salary for the 2016-17 season. In that season, he totaled 42 points in 78 games, an average of 0.54 points per game. He did not make the top 20 in the league for goals, assists, points, plus/minus, not even penalty minutes. Weber participated in the 2007 IIHF World championship, but ended up getting suspended for 3 games. He played in the 2009 IIHF World championship as an alternate captain, and lead all the defensemen in the tournament and 3rd overall in points, but ultimately lost the gold medal game to the Russian team. He also won Gold in the 2010 Vancouver games, Gold in Sochi, and Gold in the 2016 World Cup (Shea Weber Stats).
In the average game, Kessel was four times as likely to record a goal or assist than Weber; however, Weber was paid roughly 53,846% as much as Kessel. This is a pretty discouraging statistic for young girls dreaming of being pro hockey players. Studies show that girls are 6 times more likely than boys to quit playing sports by high school, and by age 17, ½ of all girls will have quit playing sports (Factors).
So, we’ve established that women’s pay doesn’t come anywhere near equal to men’s, even when performance is better, and obviously there’s a big monetary difference at the professional level, but what does this mean for the average high school girl, and the economy as a whole?
One season of ice fees, plus travel expenses, such as driving to away games, hotel stays, team dinners, cost tens of thousands of dollars. Not to mention the thousands spent on equipment each year. Plus there’s summer camps, skating clinics, private coaching sessions that all get tacked on to a year of playing. All in all, a single season can cost around $40,000. It’s estimated that in the 2017-18 season, there were approximately 10,000 high school girls playing hockey, compared to about 35,000 high school boys (Participants). This means that the sports economy was missing out on around a million dollars in total, due to this discouragement of women in sports.
And all the girls who quit playing? They lost a great way to stay in shape, have positive interactions with others, and better both their physical and mental health. They also lost out on opportunities to learn and demonstrate leadership, gain confidence, and improve their cooperation and teamwork skills that would help in the future their careers.



Works Cited
“Content Search: Kessel.” National Women's Hockey League, www.nwhl.zone/roster_players/13721065?subseason=512423.

“Factors Influencing Girls' Participation in Sports.” Women's Sports Foundation, www.womenssportsfoundation.org/support-us/do-you-know-the-factors-influencing-girls-participation-in-sports/.

“Participants U.S. High School Ice Hockey 2009-2018 | Statistic.” Statista, www.statista.com/statistics/282093/participation-in-us-high-school-ice-hockey/.

“Shea Weber Stats.” Hockey-Reference.com, www.hockey-reference.com/players/w/webersh01.html.
Wulf, Steve. “The Grand Total of Youth Hockey.” ESPN, ESPN Internet Ventures, 2 July 2013, www.espn.com/espn/story/_/id/9430472/grand-total-youth-hockey.

New Technology Actually Increases Employment

New Technology Actually Increases Employment
Emily Newcomer

People often share the common belief that new technology is taking over the economy and that jobs are often lost due to these improved technologies.  They think that robots and advanced machinery are replacing the need for human labor, thus decreasing the amount of jobs available.  However, emerging technology has actually created more jobs than it has destroyed.  This increase in demand for workers will eventually lead to a larger workforce, which will then cause a more productive and expansive economy to emerge.  Therefore, we should welcome these new technological advancements because robots won’t be taking over the economy any time soon, but instead helping it.

As with any point, there’s always a counter-argument, and in this case, it’s that the amount of jobs in the agricultural and manufacturing industries have decreased over time.  This is due to the more efficient methods of farming and manufacturing that have been produced through technology.  The argument is valid, but these job losses are far more outweighed by the jobs gained in other industries.  For example, industries such as medicine and management consultancy have boosted productivity with both better technology and more workers.  As seen in these industries, modern technology and high employment rates go hand-in-hand.  Additionally, with new technology comes the need for a different education and skill set (Makortoff).  As society adapts to become well versed in high-tech, more job opportunities will present themselves because knowledgeable workers will have to teach others how to work with new technology.

Another beneficial effect of new technology, one that might not be as obvious, is that consumer income can be distributed widely, creating even more job opportunities.  When machines replace labor, products are produced at lower costs and then consequently sold at lower costs.  If consumers no longer have to pay as much for a good or service, their money can be dispersed into other “unthought-of new areas: gym membership, short holidays, and overpriced coffees”  (Makortoff).  These changed spending habits can create new employment because a business with increased trafficking needs workers and increased demand will aid businesses in their ability to pay these extra workers.

Lastly, technology has opened up a whole new world of jobs through innovation, social media, and so many other aspects of the internet.  Jobs that involve Cybersecurity, Internet of Things (IoT), and artificial intelligence didn’t exist a few years ago.  Now, “43-53% of new job titles that have emerged in the past 10 years are in ICT (Information and Communications Technology),” (Eswaran) in India, Malaysia, and the Philippines, all of which are countries that are currently growing economically.  Innovation and entrepreneurship create jobs by establishing new businesses and concepts, and these ideas are most often aided by technology.

Technology eases our workload more than it takes our jobs.  A census study that was shortlisted for the Society of Business Economists’ Rybczynski prize indicates that the “rise of machines has been a job creator rather than making working humans obsolete” (Technology).  So fear not; robots won’t be taking over the economy any time soon, but instead will open up more job opportunities.

Works Cited

Eswaran, Vijay.  “How Emerging Technology is Driving Job Creation, New Industries.”  Chief Executive, 9 Aug. 2018, https://chiefexecutive.net/how-emerging-technology-is-driving-job-creation-new-industries/

Makortoff, Kalyeena.  “Don’t fear the robots, tech creates jobs: report.”  CNBC, 19 Aug. 2015, https://www.cnbc.com/2015/08/19/dont-fear-the-robots-tech-creates-more-jobs-than-it-destroys-report.html.

“Technology has created more jobs than it has destroyed, says 140 years of data.”  The Guardian, 18 Aug. 2015, https://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/aug/17/technology-created-more-jobs-than-destroyed-140-years-data-census.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZplSIj7_5D6K-qboGBmsNei3doF0x5X9z4day17jxVU/edit
The big debate about the future of work, explained

Returns Following Christmas

Returns Following Christmas
By: Anna Holzhauer

With Christmas just around the corner, Americans are eager to check items off of their Christmas lists.  From clothes to furniture and even cars, we average spending $800 on gifts for other people. From a consumers point of view, Christmas time is great for spending time with family and friends along with the giving and receiving of gifts. From a producers standpoint, Christmas time leads to inefficiency, hassle, and sometimes loss from the excessive returns following Christmas.

Christmas sales lead to inefficiency in the retail industry due to the increase is sales in just one month. Retailers need to have the capacity in their warehouses for the shelf space and the capacity to transport the goods to the consumers. If consumers spent all their money more evenly throughout the year, we would be using our resources more efficiently. Our economy wouldn’t have to build all the spare space that isn’t used the rest of the year. Producers are not being productively efficient during Christmas time in order to keep up with the high demand for their products.

Christmas time becomes a hassle when consumers start returning their gifts. The NY post states that around 260 billion dollars worth of stuff is returned every year and roughly 25% of those returns happen after Christmas time. Retailers have to hire more workers not only for the holidays but also the month that follows. They hire more workers in January, in order to make the return process smoother. 80% of consumers won’t make a purchase if the stores return policy is too strict or the return process is too much of an inconvenience. Producers are not only concerned about the potential loss of revenue but also the loss of future customers. Returns are a great way to increase or decrease customer happiness.


Lastly, returns can result in decreased revenue or even loss. “Retailers don’t want returned merchandise, because they don’t have room on their shelves for it, and they don’t have the resources to determine whether something’s been damaged,” NY Post says. Only 5 percent of returned presents find their way back on the store’s shelves. The other 95% of returns become a loss in the retail industry.

Works Cited

Fickenscher, Lisa. “Here's What Happens to All Those Unwanted Christmas Presents.” New York Post, New York Post, 3 Jan. 2017, nypost.com/2017/01/02/heres-what-happens-to-all-those-unwanted-christmas-presents/.

Gobry, Pascal-Emmanuel. “Let's Ruin Christmas by Turning It into an Economics Lesson.” Vice, Vice, 9 Dec. 2016, www.vice.com/en_us/article/z4nqw3/how-christmas-explains-economics.

“How To Keep After-Christmas Returns From Taking a Bite Out of January Revenues.” Shopify, Shopify, www.shopify.com/blog/how-to-keep-after-christmas-returns-from-taking-a-bite-out-of-january-revenues.

Pettit, Carl. “The Economics of Christmas - How Much Americans Spend on Presents, Cards, Travel and More.” AllChristmas.fm, allchristmas.fm/economics-of-christmas-spending/.

Do Host Cities Actually Benefit from the Olympics?

Do Host Cities Actually Benefit From The Olympics?
By Christabelle Chukwuma-Ugwu

When a city hosts the Olympics up to billions of dollars are poured into it. The hope is that the investment will boost the city’s GDP in the short term with job growth, and boost the trend GDP growth in the long run with increased tourism. Often times the impact of hosting the Olympics are less positive than expected. In the 2006 Turin Olympics, Italy lost $3.2 million. Russia spent over $50 billion on the 2014 winter olympics, but only made a revenue of about $53 million. The 2016 Rio Olympics where expected to cost $14 billion, but came out closer to $20 billion, and Rio had to tradeoff healthcare, police, and other funds, to reallocate that money to the Olympic funds (Eizikowitz, Grant).



One of the biggest issues that comes from hosting the hosting the Olympics is all of the infrastructure that a city must add to accommodate the large crowds that the Olympics draws. In Beijing’s example, the Bird’s Nest Stadium cost about $460 million to build and an additional $10 million each year to maintain (The Economics of Hosting the Olympic Games). In order to pay for the needed infrastructure most cities choose to raise taxes, and when taxes are raised the economy actually contracts. When taxes are raised people have a lowered disposable income, which leads to a decrease in spending (demand),which leads to a lowered GDP. Also, the city usually expect to regain the spent money by using Olympic venues for other purposes, but because of the specialized nature of the venues there is not much post-Olympic demand for the facilities. With very few groups that are willing to rent out the venues, instead of making revenue, cities end up wasting more money trying to maintain an unwanted and unused buildings. Additionally, many cities expect that the increased flow of money coming from tourism will continue, but it tends to decrease after the Olympics have passed, especially if there are no longer advertisements to persuade tourists to visit that city. When it comes down to it, unless a city already has the necessary infrastructure to host the Olympics, the economic strain that comes with building it is not worth the economic output that the Olympics bring.


Works Cited
CBS News. "Why Hosting the Olympics Is a "terrible Idea"." CBS News. CBS Interactive, 03 Aug. 2016. Web.

"The Economics of Hosting the Olympic Games." Council on Foreign Relations. Council on Foreign Relations. Web.

Eizikowitz, Grant. "Why the Olympics Are a Terrible Investment for the Host City." Business Insider. Business Insider, 19 Dec. 2017. Web.

Why Don't These Deals Last Forever

Why Don’t These Deals Last Forever?
By: Jack Somenske

I’m sure we’d all love if Black Friday deals lasted forever. Or even just more than once per year. I’m here to tell you why you may like this, but that can’t happen if companies want to be able to make so much money with these deals.

We’ve all heard of Black Friday. It’s the single most popular day for retail stores such as Target and Wal-Mart due to the amazing deals. It’s called Black Friday because “accountants use black to signify profit when recording each day's book entries. They use red to indicate loss. So, Black Friday means profitable Friday to retailing and to the economy. Retail and consumer spending drive almost 70 percent of U.S. gross domestic product.” (TheBalance.com)

We’ve all heard of Cyber Monday. It was created by retailers to encourage people to shop online. Cyber Monday has become the online equivalent to Black Friday and offers a way for smaller retail websites to compete with larger chains. I personally believe it’s just a thing because it’s literally just an online black friday, driving in even more sales for the company.

You may have also heard of Green Monday. “Green Monday is the biggest online shopping day in December. It falls on the second Monday of the month. That’s when shoppers realize they only have around 10 shipping days left before Christmas. In 2018, Green Monday falls on December 10.” (TheBalance.com) Green Monday is promoted by stores like Target, and Amazon. It’s called “Green Monday” due to the high number of sales on this day.


As we can see, Cyber Monday is in fact more profitable than Green Monday, but Green Monday is more profitable than Black Friday! This is due to a new wave of sales online that weren’t previously offered by retailers, and sense this is right before Christmas, people buy a lot more.

Now, if companies get so much money on these three days... why don’t they just have deals like this more often? Wouldn’t they get a lot more money? Well, not necessarily. If companies were just throwing out deals all the time, the demand for these deals won’t be as high when they do go on sale. If people know that items they want will always be going on sale, they won’t be as obligated to buy them on one particular day. Now, people know that these are one time deals, so they need to go and buy that 70 inch TV, or that new Apple Watch. The reason that these three days are so popular is because they don’t happen very often so there’s a lot of hype around them. If they happened all the time less people would buy things from them and the companies wouldn’t make as much money.



Works Cited
Amadeo, Kimberly. “Cyber Monday to Be Biggest Shopping Day of Year.” The Balance Small Business, The Balance, www.thebalance.com/cyber-monday-what-it-is-when-it-starts-and-current-trends-3305715.

Amadeo, Kimberly. “Don't Miss the Holiday Sales on Green Monday.” The Balance Small Business, The Balance, www.thebalance.com/green-monday-what-is-it-date-deals-sales-trends-3305475.

Amadeo, Kimberly. “How Black Friday Got Its Name.” The Balance Small Business, The Balance, www.thebalance.com/why-is-it-called-black-friday-3305712.

Gas Prices at an All-Time Low This Year

Gas Prices at an All-Time Low This Year
Ellie Reyes

Everyone knows that heart dropping feeling when their low gas light turns on. That feeling of dread you endure when you know it’s that time of the week to fill the tank. Well people, right now is a great time to fill your tank as much as you can. Gas prices are at an all-time low with $2.44 per gallon, which is the lowest it’s been all of 2018! Personally, I pay $50 to fully fill my car up with gas, but today it was only $35! I don’t know about all of you, but I could get used to this.

There has been an increasingly large supply of gas taking place lately all around the world. This has caused the decrease in gas prices. According to AAA, “There is more Iranian supply in the market than expected due to the U.S. granting crude sanction waivers to some of Iran’s largest importers, including India, South Korea and Japan” (“Growing”). The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries talked about potentially cutting crude production by up to 1 million barrels per day to try and even out the supply of oil. AAA also states that as long as crude stays below the $60/bbl mark, us Americans will continue to enjoy the cheap gas prices through the end of the 2018.

This is a shock to all of us, considering the average gas price in the summer came to a high of $2.97 per gallon. Although prices are low right now, they fluctuate greatly all the time. Below is some data that shows the wide range of gas prices in different states.

Highest and Lowest Current Gas Price Averages:
Top 5 states with lowest gas price averages: Missouri ($2.01), Oklahoma ($2.09), South Carolina ($2.09), Texas ($2.10) and Alabama ($2.12)
Top 5 states with most expensive gas price averages: Hawaii ($3.62), California ($3.49), Washington ($3.27), Alaska ($3.19) and Nevada ($3.12)
Top 5 states with the most stations selling gas at $2.00/gal or less (percentage of stations): Missouri (58 percent), Oklahoma (52 percent), South Carolina (41 percent), Texas (40 percent) and Mississippi (35 percent)
(“Growing”)

As stated in the stats above, the Mid-Atlantic and Northeast have very high gas price averages that are increasing by the day. Wherever you live in the U.S, your gas prices are going to vary. Arctic temperatures and violent winter weathers are main causes for the lack of supply (gas) being demanded in the Mid-Atlantic, that is just a given. DiLallo states that four main factors influencing the price of gas in the South and South east are: taxes, distributing and marketing, refining, and crude oil. 

According the diagram above, “About half the price is derived by the value of crude oil, followed by refining at 22%, taxes at 17%, and distribution and marketing at 10%. Because crude oil is traded on the global marketplace, it doesn't have a lot of impact on the difference between gas prices by state” (DiLallo). The U.S average for state gas taxes in 2015 was $0.48 per gallon, which is much lower than individual states amount per gallon. Every state varies in each category, for example refining is very common in California because they are known for their stiff environmental regulations. This condition is higher than federal regulations and add to the cost of refining gasoline in the state.

(“National”)

It is great to have such a low gas price at the moment, but as shown above, gas prices change by the day and will either be amazing or just put you in a bad mood. In 2016, the price was as low as $1.60 per gallon! How great would that be. The price of gas all depends on the supply and demand of crude in the world and how high taxes are becoming around the state you live in.

Works Cited
DiLallo, Matthew. “3 Reasons Why Gas Prices Differ By State.” The Motley Fool, The Motley Fool, 26 July 2015, www.fool.com/investing/general/2015/07/26/3-reasons-why-gas-prices-differ-by-state.aspx.

“Growing Global Crude Supply Outpaces Demand, Driving December Pump Prices to Cheapest of the Year.” AAA Gas Prices, 7 Dec. 2018, gasprices.aaa.com/q4-gas-report-growing-global-crude-supply-driving-december-pump-prices/.

“National Gas Price Average Holds Steady.” AAA Gas Prices, 8 Jan. 2018, gasprices.aaa.com/national-gas-price-average-holds-steady/.

The "Monopoly" of Google

The "Monopoly" of Google
Written by: Grade Kaderavek

It is more than likely that you have used Google at least once in the last hour, in fact, you most likely used the Chrome browser to access this blog. Google has become such a substantial part of modern life, that it is no longer given a second thought. However, the truth is Google is dominant in the digital market and many are beginning to wonder if the company is getting too powerful. In fact, the E.U. recently penalized Google billions for acting in a way that, they claim, was in violation of antitrust laws. This begs the question, is Google a monopoly or simply a dominant oligopolist? And perhaps most importantly, should the U.S. follow in Europe’s footsteps and create new restrictions in order to allow for more competition?

Though many will say that Google cannot be a monopoly in the traditional sense, because it is one of many online browsers, it is in fact a modern day monopoly. As shown in the graph to the right, Google (and Google owned companies) control over 90% of the online search industry; therefore, Google cannot be an oligopolist as all other “large” firms control significantly less than 10% of the market. Additionally, this size of market share means that Google’s decisions can be made independently and without concern as to what other firms in the industry are doing are doing; because interdependence is a major aspect of an oligopoly, this further proves that Google cannot be operating in an oligopolistic market structure.

With the level of control Google has, it has complete power over the ads, images, videos, and websites consumers see. This control only continues to grow as “the company has acquired more than 200 startups since it was founded” (Brandom). This is why some legislators have begun drafting bills that would limit the amount of acquisitions a company can have once it reaches a market values of $100 billion (Brandom). These new antitrust laws are perhaps the only way to reduce Google’s hold over the search engine market and allow for more fair competition, which is critical if consumers desire a real choice in the content they view online.

Still, others argue that being a dominant company does not make Google a monopoly. For example, Investopedia claims that there are low barriers to entering the browser market and therefore Google has not eliminated competition within the industry. However, Google does utilize anticompetitive practices in order to limit competition. In 2006 a new search engine was release called Foundem.com, which allowed consumers to enter multiple search conditions and find more specific results than possible on Google. Just two days after being released, Foundem.com lost all of its web traffic and found that Google had moved them from the first page to the 160th. Additionally, Getty Images used to be a popular website where consumers could download images and was in direct competition with Google Images. Then, in 2013 “Google adjusted how it displayed images so that rather than directing people to Getty’s website, users could easily see and download Getty...images from Google itself” (Duhigg). Therefore, while there are low barriers to entry concerning the creation of new and improved search engines, Google continuously updates itself in order to squander their success. This practice is once again shown in the graphic to the left, where after a new update, Google shopping (the dark blue line) overtakes all other competitors. Therefore, there are in fact high barriers to entry as well as anticompetitive practices in the search engine industry that do not allow any company to come close to Google’s dominance, further proving that Google is a monopoly.

Due to Google’s large market control and creation of high barriers to entry, the U.S. must limit Google’s growth under new and current antitrust laws. If the government wishes for the American consumer to have a choice in what they read and see online then something must be done to reduce the power that Google, as a modern day monopoly, enjoys.

If you are interested in learning more about Google’s anticompetitive practices, watch the video linked below.

Works Cited

Brandom, Russell. “How to Break up Facebook, Google, and Other Tech Giants.” The Verge, 5 Sept. 2018, www.theverge.com/2018/9/5/17805162/monopoly-antitrust-regulation-google-amazon-uber-facebook.

Duhigg, Charles. “The Case Against Google.” The New York Times, 20 Feb. 2018, www.nytimes.com/2018/02/20/magazine/the-case-against-google.html.

Foundem. “An analysis of Google’s public response to the EC’s formal charges.” Search Neutrality, 10 Jun. 2015, http://www.searchneutrality.org/2015/06.

Investopedia. “Is Google Becoming A Monopoly?” Investopedia, 2 Jun. 2015, www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/060315/google-becoming-monopoly.asp.

“Is Google a Monopoly?” International Policy Digest, 1 Nov. 2018, intpolicydigest.org/2018/02/18/is-google-a-monopoly/.

How Lululemon Differentiates Itself From Monopolistic Competitors

How Lululemon Differentiates Itself From Monopolistic Competitors
By: Eva Fernandez

With the concept of health and fitness on the rise, demand for athleisure clothes, created for both exercise and everyday use, is increasing at a rapid rate. An industry that used to be occupied by a few firms, has now expanded into a monopolistically competitive market with many companies attempting to target the busy, yet athletic consumer. If one thing within this industry has remained constant, it’s Lululemon’s popularity and dominant presence in this market. Lululemon is a yoga-inspired brand based in Canada. It opened in 1998, but since this date has expanded from just yoga apparel and has opened 404 stores worldwide. Lululemon can contribute its rising success and global popularity to its unique advertising strategies implemented to differentiate itself and its products from competitors.

Lululemon main competitors include Nike, Athleta, Adidas, Under Armour, Zella, and Fabletics. However, this company stands out due to how it has created its well-known brand name. One strategy Lululemon implements in their business strategy is knowing their consumers and the psychology behind their purchasing choices. According to Business Blueprint, Lululemon understands that their audience is often fitness oriented people that are non-conformists and see themselves as individuals. These consumers aren’t appealed to giant logos of these mega corporate brands. Rather, they would rather support a more personable company that emphasizes quality. Lululemon recognizes these wants and creates functional fashion with a small, reflective logo.

An advertising strategy that sets them apart is their outreach to local influencers to cost-effectively endorse the brands. Rather than spending millions to endorse a professional athlete, they opt to find about 20 highly respected fitness instructors within an area with a storefront. They send these small-community influencers some merchandise, put them on their social media, and endorse their local businesses. This builds a strong connection between corporate Lululemon and local influencers as these influencers feel loyalty to the brand and exclusively promote Lululemon to those they train. This strategy is both cost-effective and maintains the appealing atmosphere of a local, friendly business.

To maintain this feeling of a local business, employees are trained differently than those of say, Nike or Under Armour stores. These employees are titled “educators” are told to not sell the product, but rather educate the uses of each product and endorse the overall athleisure lifestyle. This allows customers to trust the brand rather than feel pressure to purchase. Customers are also addressed by name and their feedback is highly regarded. All this serves to build a relationship with the consumer so they come back and bring their friends. This cycle is what brings Lululemon its success.

Because of all these successful strategies, Lululemon can set a higher price than other brands in this monopolistically competitive industry. When a customer feels valued and confident in the quality of the clothing you can charge a high price and therefore bring in a high profit. This allows for fast expansion, ability to purchase prime property for new stores and to extend the brand internationally. The unique ways that Lululemon differentiates itself from its competitors allows it to dominate the athleisure market and find increasing success each year in operation.


“Eight Secrets to Success from Lululemon.” Business Blueprint, 2 Dec. 2016, businessblueprint.com.au/secrets-to-success-lululemon/.

“Lululemon Athletica.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 4 Dec. 2018, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lululemon_Athletica.

Newlands, Murray. “How Lululemon Made Their Brand Iconic: An Interview With SVP Of Brand Programs Eric Petersen.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 21 Feb. 2016, www.forbes.com/sites/mnewlands/2016/02/21/how-lululemon-made-their-brand-iconic-an-interview-with-svp-of-brand-programs-eric-petersen/.

Quiroz, Michael Angelo. “A Growth Strategy for Lululemon – Michael Angelo Quiroz – Medium.” Medium.com, Medium, 8 Jan. 2018, medium.com/@michaelangelo_q/a-growth-strategy-for-lululemon-68819680e511.

Tesla Impact

Tesla’s Impact on the Car Industry
By Vince Ward

As many of you may know, Tesla is the leading company involved in the production of electric power cars. They have started to create a profitable company in an industry that is hard to do well when using unconventional mainstream methods. Tesla has persevered and shown that they are more than capable at leading in this fast growing industry. Tesla pushes the car industry to new standards and in a direction that will help solve the problems that come from the standard gas powered cars.

When looking at Tesla there are two mains things to pull away from the company. The economy it creates in this new branch of automotives, and the advancements in car technology standards in creates not only in electric cars but also tradition gas powered ones as well. Let’s kick it off with the economic effects of Tesla. According to Business Insider, “Tesla's $56 billion market capitalization is greater than Ford's ($42 billion) and close to General Motors' ($58 billion), two companies that are more profitable and better at building cars”. This says a lot about Tesla’s accomplishments. They are able to be comparable to two car companies that run the industry. General Motors owns many other car companies, which include: Chevy, Buick, GMC and hold controlling stock in many other car companies. What I’m trying to say is that they are a very large company with their products still largely gas powered, and Tesla is right up there with them. Now, market capitalization is not the profits generated by a company but rather the value of company through the stock market in short terms. Lots of people believe in Elon Musk and his vision with Tesla which is why the company has become so booming. Tesla has created a wave that has lots of large car manufacturers investing heavily into the electric business. This is good for the consumer because the prices on electric cars are not cheap, which creates competition and increased effort on research, so the price of these cars will fall, which will help form an even greater market.

The market that is almost appeared out of thin air is very good for the environment and even other gas powered cars. Since electric cars are so technologically advanced, car manufacturers have made every aspect of the vehicle like a smart device. From large media displays, advanced cabin air filters, to autopilot, Tesla’s car are cutting edge vehicles, and all these features come standard in each vehicle. Tesla just increases the standards of what should be provided in every car, showing what is really capable for a car.

Finally the most important part about Tesla. Their cars are electric. In today's world, air pollution and global warming, among many other things, are very huge issues. With Tesla's cars, very viable alternatives in price and production to gas powered vehicles, roads and cities will start to become more eco friendly. Plus electricity can always be produced for these cars while we can only make so much gas with our resources. The problem is, Tesla’s cars have a higher price tag ranging from $70,000 all the way up to nearly $140,000. While this is out of the price range for many consumers, it is getting close to being affordable for all. With all the major companies investing in electric cars, production and resource costs will go down, sooner or later bringing this price in manageable range. Someday gas powered cars may be frowned upon and everyone will be driving cars of the future. When you go to buy your future car, what will you be driving?


Works Cited

/pages/Aparna-Narayanan/1540664736146509. “Electric Cars & Auto Industry: Can Tesla, GM And Other EVs Make Profits?” Investor's Business Daily, Investor's Business Daily, 21 May 2018, www.investors.com/news/electric-cars-ev-costs-tesla-gm/.

Hawkins, Andrew J. “How Tesla Changed the Auto Industry Forever.” The Verge, The Verge, 28 July 2017, www.theverge.com/2017/7/28/16059954/tesla-model-3-2017-auto-industry-influence-elon-musk.

Matousek, Mark. “Tesla Has Transformed the Car Industry - but Its Biggest Strength Could Become Its Greatest Liability.” Business Insider, Business Insider, 12 Feb. 2018, www.businessinsider.com/teslas-influence-on-the-auto-industry-2018-2.

Is College worth it?

Is College Worth It?
By: Joey Thomas

From a social standpoint sure, college is worth the money, but what about from an economic standpoint? Today, economists say college costs have a negative effect on the economy. As the cost of education continues to rise (4-6% per year) at twice the rate of inflation, higher education becomes too expensive for most people. Unless you get a degree in health, science, or engineering, there’s no way to graduate college without a huge sum of debt. However, think about the benefit that college students and graduates have towards the economy.

“The average bachelor’s degree holder contributes $278,000 more to local economies than the average high school graduate through direct spending over the course of his or her lifetime” (brookings.edu). When cities promote higher education, the end goal is to increase economic growth. Since the cost of tuition is so high, the problem is that good students from poor families aren’t likely to attend college which is fewer people to help increase economic growth. Take Harvard for example. In 2000, the price to attend HU was $33,000/year and now costs about $68,000/year. Today, most really smart students aren’t attending Ivy League schools just because of the cost. They can get the same degree at a highly reputable university for half the cost. Thus, these smaller, cheaper colleges are seeing boosts in the economy of the community because more and more students want cheaper education.

Unfortunately, with the cost of college increasing, graduates have been unable to attain increasing salaries. However, with a higher education, companies are willing to pay their workers more money because they have more skills to perform their job on day one. It’s sort of a domino effect where education is the cause of higher incomes, and people with higher incomes spend more money. Essentially, the measurement of the effect of education on economic growth is the difference in spending and consumption of college grads and non-college grads. According to table 2, “Graduate degree earners spend more than twice as much on local goods and services as high school graduates” (brookings.edu).



                                                                                     
Source: https://www.brookings.edu/research/what-colleges-do-for-local-economies-a-direct-measure-based-on-consumption/


Works Cited

Rothwell, Jonathan. “What Colleges Do for Local Economies: A Direct Measure Based on Consumption.” Brookings.edu, The Brookings Institution, 28 July 2016, www.brookings.edu/research/what-colleges-do-for-local-economies-a-direct-measure-based-on-consumption/.

VOA. “Economists Say College Costs Hurt the Economy.” VOA, VOA, 4 Feb. 2014, learningenglish.voanews.com/a/college-costs-hurt-economy/1840989.html.

A Superstar's Value to a Local Economy

Brandon Davis

Have you ever wondered how an superstar impacts a city’s economy? It has been founded by the Chicago tribune. Since Khalil Mack was traded to Chicago’s ticket sales have gone up by an extra 10%. He already impacted the economy just because of his guaranteed 60 million this year only is added to the US and Chicago’s GDP


Aaron Rodgers has done the same for the green Bay Area in 2015 Aaron Rodgers earned and raised over a million USD in just local endorsements in the Wisconsin area.  He’s made over 138 million $ in the NFL  alone which is a big boost to Wisconsin’s earnings and also the US GDP.
The bar graph to the right represents the Milwaukee Bucks and Giannis Antetokounmpo’s economic impact. If you look at 2001 and then up to 2015 the bucks economical revenue has been steadily increasing since 11-12.


In conclusion as many in sports like basketball, football and baseball each team has some very good talent on it. With that talent comes them being payed to do what they do in that sport. And in doing so they all bring income to the state with ticket sales . The millions of dollars athletes are paid all goes toward GDP. Question is how much does your favorite athlete help our economy?
 

                                                                             

Alaska's Earthquake

Alaska’s Earthquake
By: Tyler Wielgosh

On November 30th, a 7.0 magnitude earthquake struck Alaska at a depth of about 27 miles. This terrible natural disaster caused power outages, damage to roads and buildings, power outages and closures to schools, and office buildings fortunately nobody was killed but many people suffered non threatening injuries from the aftermath of this earthquake.


“Medicaid funds continue to be an issue despite the temporary closure of offices and to provide greater flexibility for federal officials in providing health aid” (weather.com) So according to the localists, they deal with at least 40,000 earthquakes a year  so while that tragic event occured not to long ago, the people who were affected have to make sure that they’re going to be prepared. After the “mainshock” strikes, there were aftershock warnings that were alerted saying “Over the next week, there will be a 4% chance of one or more aftershocks that could be larger thsan the magnitude of 7.0 and within 12 hours following the major earthquake, over 100 aftershocks have been reported with a 2.5 magnitude.” Because of the damages that has been done from this earthquake, it will take some time for the cleanup crew to repair the damaged roads and bridges becoming a major infrastructure damage to the homes, buildings, roads.

Alaska has also suffered a stronger earthquake in 1964 with a 9.2 magnitude killing 130 people which is the most strongest earthquake ever recorded in the US. While dealing with the aftermath from this tragic event property damage was estimated to about $116 million. Not only Alaska was affected by this natural disaster as well as Canada and California were affected by the aftershocks from the earthquake in Alaska causing huge tsunami’s killing hundreds of people and destroying everything.

While people all around the globe deal with natural disasters and damages that have been done to the environment, the earthquake would not cause as much damage as how the 1964 earthquake would have been. As an economical standpoint because there weren’t as much damage the repair costs wouldn’t be as much as most people would think the costs would be.


Works Cited
History.com, A&E Television Networks, www.history.com/topics/natural-disasters-and-environment/1964-alaska-earthquake.

“Alaska Earthquake Center | Earthquakes in Alaska.” 1964 M9.2 Great Alaskan Earthquake | Alaska Earthquake Center, earthquake.alaska.edu/.

Fritz, Angela. “Alaska Earthquake: Incredible Images of Where the Ground Ripped in Half.” The Washington Post, WP Company, 3 Dec. 2018, www.washingtonpost.com/weather/2018/12/03/alaska-earthquake-incredible-images-where-ground-ripped-half/?utm_term=.bacd775ffaf0.

“Over 1,000 Aftershocks Shake Alaska After Major Earthquake Strikes Anchorage.” The Weather Channel, The Weather Channel, weather.com/news/news/2018-12-03-alaska-earthquake-1000-aftershocks.

Bucks Changing the Economy

Bucks changing the economy
By: Jacob Dundon

For the last couple of years the Milwaukee Bucks haven’t always been the greatest and well known team, but ever since the firing of Jason Kidd as head coach and the recent hiring of Mike Budenholzer they have started to grow in talent and this year might be the first of many years that the Bucks have a very high chance of making it to the finals. It is mainly these expectations of the bucks that are causing the the economy to change.

With the Bucks success this year the economy is being changed mostly by Giannis becoming an allstar and his possibility of winning MVP is causing the franchise value of the Bucks to increase greatly in 2017 the value was 785 million and the now in 2018 the value is 1.075 million, but Giannis can’t do it alone, he has a very solid team following right behind him every step of the way helping and guiding Giannis to that MVP title.

This higher potential for the MVP title for Giannis is also causing his marchandise to be more desired for all Bucks fan’s. Giannis jersey is now the fourth most popular jersey in the NBA which is the highest Giannis has been in his entire career. This has also cause Milwaukee bucks fans to attend a lot more home games and by that more companies in the new arena are getting more business.


Works Cited
“2018-19 NBA MVP Award Tracker.” Basketball-Reference.com, www.basketball-reference.com/friv/mvp.html.

“Giannis Antetokounmpo.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 29 Nov. 2018, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giannis_Antetokounmpo.

“Milwaukee Bucks (Average) Home Attendance 2006-2018 | Statistic.” Statista, www.statista.com/statistics/197544/nba-home-attendance-of-the-milwaukee-bucks-since-2006/.

“Milwaukee Bucks Franchise Value 2003-2018 | Statistic.” Statista, www.statista.com/statistics/194662/franchise-value-of-the-milwaukee-bucks-of-the-nba-since-2006/.

Nmonroe. “Giannis Antetokounmpo Top 5 In NBA Jersey Sales.” Indiana Pacers, NBA.com/Bulls, 17 Jan. 2018, www.nba.com/bucks/news/giannis-antetokounmpo-highest-ever-jersey-sales.

Black Friday Weekend

Bella Petoskey
Reuter
B1 Economics
13 November 2018

Black Friday Weekend

Black Friday is known as the busiest and most important shopping day for retailers and stores, with the weekend extending to the Monday after Thanksgiving. Black Friday marks the beginning of the United States Christmas shopping season with major sales and promotional events at most retailers. In 2016, approximately 174 million people in America went shopping at stores throughout the five day weekend.

Year	Spent per Shopper	Total Spent	Percent Increase
2002	N.A.	$416.4 billion	2.1%
2003	N.A.	$437.6 billion	5.1%
2004	N.A.	$467.2 billion	6.8%
2005	$734.69	$496.2 billion	6.2%
2006	$750.70	$512.6 billion	3.2%
2007	$755.13	$525.9 billion	2.7%
2008	$694.19	$501.7 billion	-4.6%
2009	$681.83	$503.2 billion	0.2%
2010	$718.98	$529.4 billion	5.2%
2011	$740.57	$553.8 billion	4.6%
2012	$752.24	$568.7 billion	2.6%
2013	$767.24	$584.1 billion	2.9%
2014	$802.45	$608.0 billion	5.0%
2015	$805.65	$626.1 billion	3.2%
2016	$935.58	$655.8 billion	3.6%
2017	$967.13	$682.0 billion	4.0%
2018	$1,007.24	$717.5 billion	4.3%

Throughout Black Friday and up until Christmas, retailers make nearly one-third of their annual sales, and Black Friday solely makes one-fourth of their annual sales. Black Friday is extremely busy for retailers, because on Black Friday and through the rest of the weekend retailers experience mass crowds of people wanting to purchase their products. An example of the impact Black Friday has on companies is Amazon, in past years they have had over 80 million people who have shopped with them each year, and it is expected for that number to continue to rise in future years. Amazon has also made over 1.1 billion dollars from Black Friday to Cyber Monday in past years.

 As stated before, Black Friday is the beginning of the Christmas shopping season and therefore has big promotions and sales in which retailer’s lower prices on products and mass marketing to consumers about large sales and promotions that going on. This results in more people purchasing gifts and other products. Black Friday is a good example of the law of demand where the prices go down and in exchange people are more willing to purchase items and even more of those certain items.

People rush to stores with the expectations that they will be saving a large amount of money on about everything they intend on purchasing. The economy is positively impacted by Black Friday Weekend, solely due to all retailers being positively impacted, by an increase in consumer purchased caused by the lowering of prices.

Works Cited
Amadeo, Kimberly. “How Much Do Americans Spend on Black Friday?” The Balance Small Business, The Balance, www.thebalance.com/what-is-black-friday-3305710.

“Black Friday (Shopping).” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 11 Nov. 2018, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Friday_(shopping).

“Black Friday Statistics and Trends.” Fundivo, www.fundivo.com/stats/black-friday-statistics/#.
“How Does Black Friday Work?” Economics Stack Exchange, economics.stackexchange.com/questions/9531/how-does-black-friday-work.

Mott, Nathaniel. “Here's How Much Money Amazon Will Probably Make on Black Friday.” Inverse, Inverse, 3 July 2018, www.inverse.com/article/23995-how-much-money-amazon-black-friday-2016?refresh=2.

“The Trouble With Black Friday.” NPR, NPR, 16 Nov. 2011, www.npr.org/sections/money/2011/11/16/142386652/the-trouble-with-black-friday.

The Wealth of Cities

The Wealth of Cities
Katelyn Rokus

It’s no secret that some cities are wealthier than others. As of 2018, the 15 cities with the highest GDP accounted for $24 trillion, about 11% of the world’s total wealth (Desjardins). While certain cities have always been wealthier due to a larger population or an advantageous location, recent trends in the United States have indicated that the gap in wages between more and less wealthy cities has been widening for educated workers (“Superstar Cities”). Ultimately, this divergence is due to the inability of small cities to compete in the monopolistically competitive “industry” of production in cities.












Just as restaurants or clothing stores need to somete for customers, cities must compete to be the location of wealthy firms, such as Google or Amazon, whose business brings along large numbers of high-paying jobs. Each city offers its own unique location, infrastructure, customers, and labor pool, meaning that the decision of which city to choose matters to a firm. In this way, each city represents a differentiated product for firms to select from.

While some cities do offer firms monetary bids to locate there (“Superstar Cities”), nonprice competition is much more common. Product discrimination often takes the form of location and quality. Metropolitan areas, by nature, contain a large population, placing business in close proximity to potential customers. This benefit of location allows firms to save on the cost of transporting goods to customers. More importantly, highly educated workers are more concentrated in large cities, making it easier to find workers with specialized skills (“Superstar Cities”). Between their lack of population and dispersion of educated workers, small cities find it hard to draw firms to their locations.

As more and more firms move to big cities, educated workers follow, perpetuating the cycle of wage inequality. One proposed solution to this problem for cities to “collectively agree to stop competing to lure firms with piles of taxpayer cash” (“Superstar Cities”). This would create a more even playing field for smaller cities, however, collusion is nearly impossible in monopolistic competition. With the incentive of housing wealthy firms, cities would be likely to undercut the agreement to stop bribing firms. The only way for small cities to effectively reduce the regional wage gap would be to invest in the education of their citizens. If small cities could prove the value of their labor force, they might be able to draw firms away from major metropolitan areas.

Works Cited

Desjardins, Jeff. “The 15 Richest Cities Hold 11% of the Planet's Wealth.” Business Insider, Business Insider, 21 Feb. 2018, www.businessinsider.com/the-15-richest-cities-hold-11-of-the-planets-wealth-2018-2.

“Superstar Cities Have a Big Advantage in Attracting High-Paying Jobs.” The Economist, The Economist Newspaper, 15 Nov. 2018, www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2018/11/17/superstar-cities-have-a-big-advantage-in-attracting-high-paying-jobs.

The Destruction of Unions

The Destruction of Unions
by: Camden Moeller

The reformers were cascading on the doorstep of capitol hill. Their intent: to fix an upcoming budget crisis. Wisconsin was facing a huge budget deficit during 2009-2011, but this was before the state lost one eighth of their manufacturing jobs ("Wisconsin State Budget 2010-2011"). The recession devastated the state economy so much, that tax revenue fell by an astonishing 12%. But Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker had a plan to rectify the defect, however, his plan had destructive consequences. Scott Walker's plan, known as Act 10, was detrimental to the benefits of hard working state employees.

Act 10’s primary objective was to curb the state deficit by making unions fees optional, reducing income, slashing retirement benefits, and shortening sick leave for almost all public Wisconsin employees.

Thousands of citizens swarmed the capitol with righteous anger and demanded that the plan be rejected, they demanded an ousting of Governor Walker. The capitol building was flooded with protesters for three weeks, but in the end, their efforts were in vain. The measure passed, sealing the fate of teachers and other public employees.

One of the most negatively impacted professions was teaching. According to David Madland from the CAPA, "The average teacher salary decreased by over $1,200 between the 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 school years, while retirement and healthcare benefits dropped nearly $6,000.”

With Unions disappearing across the state, many teachers saw that their legally binding negotiated collective bargaining contracts were quickly replaced by handbooks, made by school administrators, that can be changed at anytime. Gary, a Wisconsin teacher, said “They handed it out and said, ‘This is the handbook.’ That's it...there are things in there that are good for us, but they could be taken away tomorrow.”

As the years passed, union membership rates sharply declined. According to Cnn Business, “Wisconsin unions went from representing 14.1% of workers in the state in 2011 to 9% in 2016.” Wisconsin went from one of the highest union membership rates in the country. To the lowest in the midwest (Bureau of Labor Statistics).
Likely inspired by Act 10, Mark Janus, a public worker from Illinois, filed a lawsuit against the State of Illinois because he felt that it was unjust for a union to charge him for union dues as a state employee. The controversial rulings on the case in lower courts were appealed all the way up to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court decided in favor of Mark Janus that Unions could no longer charge mandatory fees to public employees. Despite this, Union contracts with employers must cover all workers, even the ones who don't pay the fees. This unfair ruling incentives employees to not pay their union dues, since they will receive the benefits regardless if they pay the fees or not. This has proven hard for once strong unions to afford to survive under these new conditions.

Even though Scott Walker lost his reelection bid this month, Act 10 will forever be carved in stone. With the Supreme Court ruling against unions this year to enshrine Act 10 federally. The benefits of hardworking teachers and public employees will unfortunately be a thing of the past, not just for Wisconsin, but for the whole country.

Work Cited

“In the Aftermath of Act 10: The Changed State of Teaching in a Changed State.” Taylor and Francis Online, www.tandfonline.com/eprint/DGtFksmyInUyXHjEfAxF/full.

Madland, David, and Alex Rowell. “Attacks on Public-Sector Unions Harm States: How Act 10 Has Affected Education in Wisconsin.” Center for American Progress Action,

www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/economy/reports/2017/11/15/169146/attacks-public-sector-unions-harm-states-act-10-affected-education-wisconsin/.

“Union Membership Rates by State in 2016.” U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 23 Feb. 2017, www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2017/union-membership-rates-by-state-in-2016.htm.