Thursday, May 30, 2019

Trade War: What’s the Real Cost?

Trade War
What’s the Real Cost?
By: Paul Quartaroli

What is a trade war? A trade war is an economic conflict that results from countries creating  trade barriers of tariffs or quotas against another country in response to trade barriers set up against them. Now let’s go into the trade war between China and the US.

During the summer of 2018 China accused the United States of launching a trade war and said they would respond with similar tariffs for US imports. So, where does this leave the US?

President Trump wants the US to return to the power house economic nation it use to be. He doesn’t want the US to lose jobs to other countries like China and Mexico where labor is less expensive and he doesn’t want the US to be dependent on Chinese imports. The ultimate goal is to bring jobs and industry back to the US.  What is the cost of this desired outcome?

President Trump placed tariffs on Chinese imports to help push the US economy to be more self sufficient.  When this was done China responded with tariffs on US goods that are of value in China. On April 30, 2019 the US and China were hopeful for a trade deal. “A private chat between China’s leader Liu He and US representatives Seven Mnuchin changed the mood” (Xin).  However, “China claimed  the US side had kept adding extra demands before accusing Beijing of reneging on what was agreed upon” (Xin). It was hoped these trade talks would end the costly trade war between the two largest economies. “Five days later, the once hopeful negotiations took a sudden turn. US President Donald Trump announced on Twitter on May 5 that the United States would increase tariffs from the 10 percent to 25 percent on US $200 billion of Chinese goods” (Xin). The Chinese officials were not happy and decided to hit back which will make it even more difficult for the two countries to come to an agreement. It remains uncertain what exactly caused this impasse but the global markets when into a tailspin. People who invested money into the stock market lost as investments tumbled. Such investments are used to pay expenses for people who are retired, people who hope to help their children with college expenses and business owners to name a few.  This type of financial loss trickles down to impact just about every American. 

The US saw such an economic tragedy during the Great Depression from 1929-1939. “This was the longest and most severe depression ever experienced by the industrialized Western world. Although it originated in the United States the Great Depression caused drastic declines in output, severe unemployment, and acute deflation in a almost every country of the world.”  During this time unemployment was at 25% and more than 5000 banks had gone out of business. “Out of work Americans filled long breadlines begged for food, or sold apples on street corners” (Recchiuti).  A Chicago Social Worker wrote, “We saw Want and Despair walking the streets, and our friends, sensible,thrifty families reduced to poverty” (Recchiuti).  If the trade wars continue at its current pace will the US see another Great Depression that it will not be able to recover from?  It’s quite possible.


Works Cited

Recchiuti, Louis. “Khanacademy.” The Great Depression, 2019, www.khanacademy.org/humanities/us-history/rise-to-world-power/great-depression/a/the-great-depression

Xin, Zhou and Wendy Wu. “South China Morning Post.” Was this the moment US- China trade talks fell apart?, 28 May, 2019, www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3012049/was-moment-us-china-trade-talks-fell-apart


Tuesday, May 28, 2019

Why the Dollar?

Why the Dollar?
Noah Z.

The obvious answer is that we were the only surviving economy during post-war reconstruction, but the finer points of what we call exorbitant privilege come from a small town in New Hampshire. The Mount Washington Hotel is in an area called Bretton Woods, which is the name we economists gave to the post-war economic system when delegations from from a litany of nations in 1944 wrote a comprehensive resolution on international trade. This is the whole thing at a light 71 pages, and much like the Lord of the Flies, you don’t need to read the whole thing to know what it’s about.


In short, Bretton Woods made the US Dollar the primary unit of trade, and helped keep the foreign exchange market in some sort of equilibrium; in order to buy shares of the IBRD, the international bank that loans out money to the countries which have burgeoning economies, one had to use USD, and the IMF required gold, but if a reserve currency appreciated or depreciated, that reserve currency would flow in or out of the IBRD or IMF depending. Theoretically this limits the ability of nations to engage in economic warfare by manipulating exchange rates to their own advantage. As can be expected, the US controlled a third of all shares in the IBRD, and whoever has the largest amount of shares has the greatest voting power in the IBRD, which is what we would now refer to as the World Bank in conjunction with the International Development Association which didn’t come about until 1960. There is also a board of 12 directors, 5 of which are nominated by the top 5 shareholders, which includes America. Not only was and is the USD the primary unit of trade, but the new world order following 1945 allowed America to be the largest force in the various international organizations.


Noticeably absent from the list of nations as members of the IMF  was the USSR, which signed the final Act, but didn’t ratify the accord. If any 2 economies are intact after the war, it is America’s and the USSR’s, but the USSR’s lack of involvement in the post-war reconstruction was a momentous failure in the department of foreign relations; another key goal of the IMF was to provide a method for the crippled establishments of Europe to kickstart their economies, which is what we see in the Marshall Plan not 3 years after the war. The American sphere of influence extended across Western Europe during post-war reconstruction.


If not another global power, there was one proposal made in an effort to limit the US projection of power, from none other than John Maynard Keynes, the british delegate at the committee. Instead of placing all the currencies onto USD, he proposed the bancor, a supranational currency to be used solely as a unit of account; individuals would not trade in bancor; nations would trade in bancor by exchanging gold for it, as opposed to a system of pegged exchange rates and the USD as a reserve currency. Certainly this alleviates a portion of the foreign dependencies and trade imbalances, but due to the strong US delegation of Harry Dexter White and the power of American hegemony, his ideas could not gain traction.

Any manner in which the tale is spun, the United States gained exorbitant privilege in the global economy, and that still influences today’s market; America has the ability to pull the strings of the IMF with their committee votes and decide where the loans go; the game of global trade was written with the rules rigged in America’s favor, so the burden of the moral imperative when it comes to foreign dependencies, unequal trade, and control of the supply chains falls to the American hegemony.



Works Cited
“Bancor.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 18 Dec. 2018, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bancor.

“Bretton Woods Conference.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 28 Feb. 2019, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bretton_Woods_Conference.

Chen, James. “Bretton Woods Agreement.” Investopedia, Investopedia, 13 Apr. 2019, www.investopedia.com/terms/b/brettonwoodsagreement.asp.

“John Maynard Keynes.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 27 May 2019, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Maynard_Keynes.

The Economic Effects of Milwaukee Sports

The Economic Effects of Milwaukee Sports
By: Elliot Mueller

Milwaukee sports fans have gone through decades of poor play from both the Brewers and the Bucks. But recently both franchises have completely turned the corner and are among the most elite teams in their respective sports. Both are considered one of the best teams in their league. This has Milwaukee sports fans excited. As each team saw their success increase, the city of Milwaukee has seen an increase in economic benefits.


The biggest reason both franchises have turned around, are the stellar performances that each team is receiving from their best player. After being traded from the Marlins to the Brewers, Christian Yelich won the 2018 National League MVP award in his first season in Milwaukee. In 2018 the Brewers team reached the NLCS but lost in game 7 to the LA Dodgers. Although falling short of the world series these are major strides for the franchise as the team went 96-67 in 2018 which was the best record in the National League. Brewers fans remember just three short years ago in 2015 the team had an embarrassing record of 68-94. An immense amount of credit can be given to Christian Yelich who came in and made Milwaukee a true contender. A similar story can be told about the Milwaukee Bucks, who in 2013 went 15-67. That was the worst record in the NBA that year. But fast forward a few years to 2018, the Bucks had the best record in the league sitting at 60-22. Majority of the credit can be given to MVP hopeful Giannis Antetokounmpo. The Bucks reached the Eastern Conference Finals and lost in game 6. Each team has completely flipped their franchise around and the results have been incredible for the city of Milwaukee.

The success of the Milwaukee teams has brought buzz to the city and has helped increase business for the local restaurants, hotels, and really any business in the city of Milwaukee. Brewers ticket sales have increased by a whopping 20% and this will continue to rise as the team remains elite. The same can be said as the Bucks who saw their season ticket holders reach an all time high of 10,000 holders. That number has never been reached in the history of the Milwaukee Bucks. The city has a different feeling to it as sports fans are excited to go out and watch their favorite team compete at a high level every night. As the Bucks and Brewers continue their success we can bet that Milwaukee will see it’s economic benefits continue to increase.

Works Cited
Bizjournals.com, www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/news/2018/03/01/with-expectations-high-brewers-ticket-sales.html.

NBA.com. “The Official Site of the NBA.” NBA.com, NBA.com, 3 Nov. 2016, www.nba.com/#/.
“The Official Site of Major League Baseball.” MLB.com, www.mlb.com/.

Rovell, Darren. “Bucks Sell Team-Record 10,000 Season Tickets.” ESPN, ESPN Internet Ventures, 9 Oct. 2018, www.espn.com/nba/story/_/id/24942314/bucks-sell-team-record-10000-season-tickets.

How the Bucks’ playoff run affects Milwaukee’s economy:

How the Bucks’ playoff run affects Milwaukee’s economy:
By: Thales Andrade Pereira                                                                       

Since the Bucks’ playoff series win 18 year drought is over, there is nothing better to discuss than their economic impact in their host city, Milwaukee. Although Giannis Antetokounmpo & Company ended up losing to Drake’s Toronto Raptors in the Eastern Conference Finals, it was the first time since the 2000-2001 season that the Bucks have won a playoff series. Everything, from local restaurants downtown to hotels have been hauling in more revenue than ever.  "This is one of those great, great times for Milwaukee, for Wisconsin and certainly, for the Bucks." said Bucks’ President Peter Feigin.


According to Lindsey McKee from Visit Milwaukee, the estimated dollar value impact of every home game of the 2018-2019 season was $3 million. That is not $3 million straight to the Fiserv Forum, but $3 million spread to the wide variety of businesses in town.  The beloved Greg Marcus, famous for owning the Marcus Theaters and Hotels, testimonied saying that the success of the Milwaukee Bucks has put Milwaukee’s name across newspapers of the world, and therefore spreading a good word on Milwaukee’s hospitality and ultimately bringing in more fans. Another witness of the economic boom of Milwaukee is the General Manager of The Iron Horse Hotel, Brian Fahey. The Hotel is directly next to the Bucks Mural, which is considered a must visit for real Bucks fans. Fahey mentioned that an army of fans come by to visit the mural prior to the game, and a good number of the platoons end up stopping by and having a drink in the lobby.


Although it did not end up coming to reality, the estimated economic impact of the NBA finals hosted in Milwaukee would have been $11.3 millions dollars. While the players on the court do not play with boosting the city’s economy on their mind, keeping that number in mind would be efficient for Peter Feign. With the Bucks playing around 10 games more that usual per season, and hauling in a calculated $30 million more than any past season within 18 years, Milwaukee’s rise from one of the nation’s lowest GDP per capita in a metropolitan area is likely. While underlooked, the Milwaukee Bucks economic impact, may not be the highest in the country, but the most valuable due to the uprising of its host city together with the team’s success.

Works Cited
Bizjournals.com, www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/news/2019/04/12/sports-tourism-had-economic-impact-of-28m-on.html.

“'They're Coming from All over:' Bucks' Success Brings Big Business to Milwaukee Hotels.” FOX6Now.Com, 22 May 2019, fox6now.com/2019/05/22/theyre-coming-from-all-over-bucks-success-brings-big-business-to-milwaukee-hotels/.

“Bucks' NBA Playoff Run Could Bring Big Boost to Milwaukee's Economy.” FOX6Now.Com, 10 May 2019, fox6now.com/2019/05/09/bucks-nba-playoff-run-could-bring-big-boost-to-milwaukees-economy/.

Wagner, Andrew. “Giannis Antetokounmpo Has Made The Small-Market Milwaukee Bucks An International Brand.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 1 Apr. 2019, www.forbes.com/sites/andrewwagner/2019/03/31/giannis-antetokounmpo-has-made-the-small-market-milwaukee-bucks-an-international-brand/#55867378c3ed.

Wednesday, May 22, 2019

Big Bucks for Milwaukee

Big Bucks for Milwaukee
Anna Cottrill

We Wisconsinites are very proud of all of our sports teams. No matter where you go around town, it is pretty much a given that you will see someone supporting the Packers, the Brewers, the Badgers, or the Bucks. Right now, we are in the heat of the Bucks’ journey to the NBA Finals, and that is bringing a lot of attention to our city. Many people from all over come to watch the basketball games, which has had great economic impacts on the city of Milwaukee.

The big economic changes that have occured in our city due to the Bucks’ playoff presence has been in our tourism industry. People from all over the nation have come to Milwaukee to watch the games at our newly established Fiserv Forum. This means that there has been an increase in hotel guests, thus bringing in quite a bit of money just from staying overnight in Milwaukee. Additionally, these basketball fans have been spending money on food and beverages while in town, and not to mention utilizing the many forms of transportation that our city has to offer. Finally, the fans need to have gear to support the team, which increases the demand for Bucks memorabilia. In all, it was estimated that each home Bucks game brings in about $3 million to our city (fox6now.com). In fact, if (or rather, when) the Bucks get to the NBA Finals, Milwaukee will be looking at about $12 million brought into our city.

It is important to note that not only does supporting our Bucks help them win, but the proceeds spent during these events help our city grow and prosper. We know that increased economic activity by consumers means that our whole economy will grow. By having visitors from other cities, as well as our own fans attend the basketball games, our city can grow economically. This growth can help ensure that the city’s living conditions and job opportunities continue to grow and improve. On May 9th, Mayor Tom Barrett stated that there is a potential to host a parade for our beloved team, as well as increase the publicity for our city.

In conclusion, our beloved Bucks have been stirring up quite a bit of attention for Milwaukee. Giannis and the rest of the team are responsible for driving up the sales of sports memorabilia, and bringing in fans from all over. Each and every home game is bringing in a large sum of money, which helps fuel Milwaukee’s economy greatly. The farther the Bucks go in the playoffs, the more money our city will acquire. Let’s cheer on our Bucks and bring more money into our economy. Go Bucks!

Works Cited
Bizjournals.com, www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/news/2019/05/20/fiserv-forum-bucks-playoff-run-boost-milwaukees.html.
“Bucks' NBA Playoff Run Could Bring Big Boost to Milwaukee's Economy.” FOX6Now.Com, 10 May 2019, fox6now.com/2019/05/09/bucks-nba-playoff-run-could-bring-big-boost-to-milwaukees-economy/.
“Bucks' NBA Playoff Run Could Bring Big Boost to Milwaukee's Economy.” FOX6Now.Com, 10 May 2019, fox6now.com/2019/05/09/bucks-nba-playoff-run-could-bring-big-boost-to-milwaukees-economy/.
“NBA Celebrity Appearances Boost Excitement for Milwaukee Playoff Run.” CBS58, www.cbs58.com/news/nba-celebrity-appearances-boost-excitement-for-milwaukee-playoff-run.

World Without Waste

Ethan Reinke

Coca-Cola, a influential monopoly that has gradually taken influence in our society as a whole for over a hundred years. Spanding way from just manufacturers of soft drink beverage;The company's goals have undergone some changes in the recent year. With electing a new company president and chief operating officer. Furthermore, the initiation of the World Without Waste initiative has caused the company to pursue the environmental preservation movement. With the initiative, Coca-Cola states that they will try to achieve that they will recycle one bottle or can that is produced by them. For every product that is sold by them. Not only is this pursuit in recycled products a recent development, this has been shown through the companies joining of global partnerships, introduction of a new technology “PlantBottle” to be used throughout the industry.

Meaning, with the introduction of this new goal of using more recycled bottles for soft drink products in the Coca-Cola Industry. This change would not only help to improve, pollution occuring in the world. Do to the fact that the Coca-Cola company resides in selling products in 193 countries around the globe. Meaning every single country in the world sells Coke products except Cuba and North Korea. Than by taking into the account of having 1.9 billion drinks produced by the company consumed per day. With the integration of the World Without Waste Initiative not only would we as a society be able to reduce the amount of plastics and cans being used per day by a landslide. Meaning if Coke accomplishes it’s recycling goal by 2030. We as a society would be able to recycle and reuse over a billion drink containers. This goal wouldn’t just impact the Coca-cola company. It would impact the entire world. With the reduction in cost of making soft drinks, which would also result in other companies in the business like Pepsi and RC Cola to also pursue the same goal.

This is do to their need of competition. So, if Coca-cola is able to produce products cheaper and at a more efficient rate, they would be able to sell their product less resulting in increase in overall profit.  Which will lead to the change in the market as a whole. Meaning, we as consumers will be able to profit from this through, reduction in price of soft-drinks, and less pollution of can’s and recyclables in the environment. Just from the change in a single company as of Coca-Cola, has the potential of not only shifting the market economy of plastic production, and commercial beverages as a whole. It will also play a huge role in the change of tendencies we as people use recyclables, and the future of environment of the planet.

Are STEM Majors Still Promising?

Are STEM Majors Still Promising?
Julia Derzay

STEM. Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math. It has been said for decades now that those who truly want to succeed will definitely want to go into a STEM major. This argument is always backed up by several pieces of data. The average salary of an entry level computer scientist is about 65,000 dollars, while the average salary of a person with a liberal arts degree is usually only about 40,000 dollars (www.payscale.com). In addition, a common argument is that there is much more demand for a STEM major than a liberal arts degree, as about 107,000 people graduated with a computer science degree in 2017, and the amount of jobs openings for a computer science major is at about 108,000 (New York Times). So it is true that in terms of money, STEM majors seem to have it the best right now, but are all STEM majors equal in promise?


According to the New York Times, about 73 percent of STEM job growth will be through the computer science area, but only 3 percent will go towards physical sciences, and another 3 percent towards life sciences. These physical and life science majors are some of the most integral subjects that are studied in high school such as: biology, chemistry, physics, and psychology. Not only is the job growth declining, but only about 13 percent of the graduates that had a degree in life and physical science have reported that they actually received the job they went to college for.

To make matters worse, in order to get a job that one wants, it is most likely that these science majors will need at least a Master’s degree to get any career with a sustainable salary. Lastly, science research is a career that is reliant heavily upon subsidies from the government or a university to function. However, computer scientists and engineers often do not need this same help. In 2018’s national budget, there was actually an increase in science funding from the government by about 176.8 billion dollars, however, in the next few years, President Trump plans to cut funding further from the EPA, the Department of Energy’s Office of Science, NOAA, and the US Geological Survey(www.sciencemag.com). This will further cut the amount of careers that science majors can go into, and will also harm the GDP, as it was projected that research accounted for 145 billion dollars of the real GDP in 2015 (www.smh.com).

Not only are Science majors beginning to fade, but Math Majors as well. In fact, since 2017, many math majors are simply turning to computer science instead, which is a major that needs math, but is not a “math major”. Other than this, math enthusiasts can really only turn to either being an actuary scientist or becoming a math teacher, two extremely different careers. Perhaps the praise that many STEM students receive should only be limited in the “T” or “E” areas. So does this make science and math obsolete majors, falling into the same trap that many liberal arts majors have seen in the past decade? No. Of course, it is always important to study what you believe you have the greatest passion in, but it is also reasonable to keep in mind what opportunities await you once college ends. Knowing your path and planning around certain obstacles is imperative to success.


Works Cited
Deep in the guts of what makes up the GDP. “Technology Helped America's Economy Way More than We Thought.” CNNMoney, Cable News Network, money.cnn.com/2018/08/03/news/economy/gdp-economic-growth-technology/index.html.

“Do STEM Majors Really Enjoy an Advantage?” The College Solution, 13 Nov. 2013, www.thecollegesolution.com/do-stem-majors-really-enjoy-an-advantage/.

Lohr, Steve. “Where the STEM Jobs Are (and Where They Aren't).” The New York Times, The New York Times, 1 Nov. 2017, www.nytimes.com/2017/11/01/education/edlife/stem-jobs-industry-careers.html.

Phillips, Nicky, and Gareth Hutchens. “Science Directly Contributes $145b to GDP: Report.” The Sydney Morning Herald, The Sydney Morning Herald, 26 Mar. 2015, www.smh.com.au/technology/science-directly-contributes-145b-to-gdp-report-20150324-1m6m63.html.

Science News StaffMar. 23, 2018, et al. “Trump, Congress Approve Largest U.S. Research Spending Increase in a Decade.” Science, 23 Mar. 2018, www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/03/updated-us-spending-deal-contains-largest-research-spending-increase-decade.

Writers, Staff. “Math Careers: In Demand Mathematics Career Paths for 2018.” LearnHowToBecome.org, LearnHowToBecome.org, 21 Apr. 2019, www.learnhowtobecome.org/careers-in-mathematics/.

Tuesday, May 21, 2019

Why the AAF did not work

Why the AAF did not work
Written by: Grant G.

The Alliance of American Football was a professional football league that blew through hundreds of millions of dollars and shut down in 32 days.  This leads to the question of why did it run out of money that quickly?

They started their season after the NFL season was complete causing no competition.  They had over 6 million people watch the first week of the season with thousands of people in attendance to these games.  They even had a $250 investment by Tom Dundon, owner of the Carolina Hurricanes of the NHL and owner of TopGolf.  With all of these things working in favor of the league, what caused it to fail?


Many fans believe that the lack of talent and big names made the league go bankrupt.  Although many of the players had some talent they were still not good enough to play in the NFL causing less highlight plays and less interest.  Another reason could be an oversupply of football causing people to stay loyal to the NFL with a better product and the teams they have supported most of their lives.  It was rumored that the AAF tries to form an agreement to make the AAF a developmental league for the NFL, but the NFL wanted to be the only football league to maximize profits and have a long offseason to build excitement for the season.  This causes the NFL to keep their monopoly going and keeping high prices for attending games and buying merchandise.  Many other leagues have tries to compete with the NFL, but cannot compete with the funding and fanbase loyalty the NFL has established. 

Works Cited
“Alliance of American Football.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 15 May 2019, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alliance_of_American_Football#Business.

Wakefield, Kirk. “Why The AAF Was Doomed To Fail.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 4 Apr. 2019,

www.forbes.com/sites/kirkwakefield/2019/04/03/why-the-aaf-failed-before-it-started/#34060d91b70c.

EU Tariffs on Auto Exports to the US

EU Tariffs on Auto Exports to the US
Written by: Nik D.

During spring break of sophomore year, my family and I got a chance to travel to Sweden to pick up our Xc90 Volvo and get a chance to go on a factory tour. On the right is a visual of the plant we visited. The best part about all of this is that it was all paid for by the car company. Why would a car company pay for the airfare, food, and factory tour for five individual?

When delving more into why the company actually benefits, we need to understand why they would pay for us in the first place. It turns out that European governments place large tariffs on brand-new, exported cars. By having our family come to their plant and drive our car around the block, it can be considered used and the tariffs go out the door. Yes, it costs the car company eight to ten thousand dollars to have a family of five to go to their plant, but that just goes to show that the tariffs are larger than this. I argue that the European governments should continue to keep these exportation tariffs on newly crafted cars.

One reason that these tariffs should remain in place is because they help boost the value of the Euro through tourism. Without the tariffs, Americans would just stay within the United States and buy European cars from dealerships. With the tariffs, it provides the car companies with an incentive to pay for Americans to come overseas. When these Americans come overseas, they will likely spend money in Europe. Because the exchange rate of the American Dollar is higher and the value of the American Dollar is more than the Euro, the Euro would raise in value.

Another reason why these tariffs should be sustained is because it allows for more European cars to stay in Europe. The tariffs provide incentives for the car companies to keep European manufactured cars within Europe because they would be cheaper for the car companies to sell their cars within Europe. These tariffs were likely imposed in the first place because the companies were exporting too many cars and there was a deficit of European-made cars in Europe.

In conclusion, the tariffs imposed on European car manufacturers are beneficial for European economies. They allow for more cars to stay within Europe and when Americans want to buy one of their cars, they “need” to go overseas to drive their car and technically make it a used car. When doing so, they will likely spend money in Europe, eventually making the European dollar worth more and have money flow into Europe instead of out.


Sources:

“Amid China Trade Tangle, Trump May Delay Auto Tariffs for E.U.” NBCNews.com, NBCUniversal News Group, www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/amid-china-trade-tangle-trump-may-delay-auto-tariffs-eu-n1005991.

“EU Is Ready to Retaliate as Trump Auto-Tariff Deadline Nears.” Bloomberg.com, Bloomberg, www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-13/eu-is-ready-to-retaliate-as-trump-s-auto-tariff-deadline-nears.

Navigating Expensive Box Offices

Navigating Expensive Box Offices
Written by: Noah O'Neal

Our beloved Milwaukee Bucks have been on a speeding train throughout this entire season. Every team the come across, they seem to have some kind of answer and won about 75% of their games in the regular season. Not only were Bucks a force to reckon with in the regular season, but they have stayed on that speeding train so far in the postseason. Throughout the postseason it has became harder and harder for fans to get tickets to the games. The demand for these tickets grew, but the supply did not, there are only so many seats in the brand new Fiserv Form. 17,500 to be exact. As the demand for play off tickets grows, along comes quite a large price tag. The Bucks are just games away from the NBA Finals, and with home court advantage, those ticket prices will only get higher.

According to StubHub.com, the cheapest tickets you can get for game one of the Finals cost $446.00 for each ticket and that for standing room only. Let’s say you actually want a set though, you are now looking at $500 for arguable the worst seats in the house. Some might say there is no bad seat in the , but let’s be real, it would be better to just watch the game on TV. StubHub also says that courtside tickets are expected to start at $6,000.00 each. This would put you on the court, row 1, right under the hoop.  Now let’s look a little deeper into the economics behind all of this. Why would someone pay $500 to barely see the game. Or why pay $6,000 just to watch a two hour basketball game. Also, how do owners determine the prices of each ticket?

Finals tickets are an inelastic good. The increase in prices causes less then a 1% change in the quantity demanded meaning it’s inelastic. People will still pay observed amounts of money to see these games because quantity is limited. This tells owners that they can raise the prices of tickets and people will still come and buy them. But now the question is, how high is too high for ticket prices? This is where they factor in marginal utility. Marginal utility is a way to determine how much satisfaction a customer will receive from a product. This is why that the worst seats in the house are still so expensive. Even though that person can barely see the games, they are still satisfied with spending $500 just to be at the NBA Finals and get to cheer on their Bucks. This also applies to the person sitting under hoop. They are satisfied with paying $6,000 for those seats because the marginal utility received is worth $6,000 to that sold out fan. Also now a broke sold out fan.

So, throughout the rest of the NBA Finals, and other big events, look closer at the big price tag on tickets. The prices rise because they are an inelastic good, and the supply is limited. They also go up because the marginal utility is greater than a typical games, and lastly the fact that some people just have way too much disposable income.



Works Cited
Durst, Nicholas. “DGS Staff Predictions: Who Will Win The 2019 NBA finals? • Double G Sports.”

Double G Sports, 5 May. 2019, doublegsports.com/who-will-win-the-2019-NBA-Finals/.

“StubHub!” StubHub, www.stubhub.com/milwaukee-bucks-fiserev-froum-10-23-2018/event/103753469/?sort=quality+desc&tktbkt=1.

Wednesday, May 15, 2019

Religious Chicken

Religious Chicken
Camden Moeller

If you don't feel comfortable eating a murdered animal, Great! If you don't want to buy products made in sweatshops, Awesome! Don’t want to eat Ben & Jerry's because of their donation to liberal causes? Sweet! Don’t want to eat at In and Out because of their conservative positions? Fantastic. But when you look at the facts, movements to boycott a corporation almost always fail and sometimes have the opposite results.

Chick-fil-A is one example of a corporation that not only survived a boycott but flourished. In 2010, Chick-fil-A donated millions of dollars to groups considered ‘hostile’ to LGBT groups. A few years later the CEO of Chick-fil-A, Dan Cathy, guest starred on a syndicated radio talk show. One of the radio hosts asked Dan Cathy about Chick-fil-A’s opposition to same-sex marriage. In response, he said, “We are inviting God’s judgment on our nation when we shake our fist at him and say, ‘We know better than you as to what constitutes a marriage’”. This comment caused a flood of criticism and put Chick-fil-A’s donations under the spotlight. Immediate calls to boycott the company were evident. Republican politician, Mike Huckabee, called for conservatives to eat at Chick-fil-A on August 1st. Opponents of same-sex marriage flooded Chick-fil-A’s and it turned out to be a record-setting day in profit for Chick-fil-A. Chick-fil-A’s sales skyrocketed by 12% in 2012 despite the calls for the boycott the opposition rose up to defend what they believe in. To avoid further controversy, Chick-fil-A reduced their donations to ‘hostile’ groups and stepped out of the policy debate. The anger at the restaurant chain quickly faded, and while there are still old scars for progressives who won’t eat there, the boycott is pretty much dead.

This opposition is coined as a ‘buycott’, often is the result of boycotts as seen with Chick Fil A. Are you participating in any boycotts/buycotts? Let me know in the comments below.

Tuesday, May 14, 2019

The Bucks Making Big Bucks for Milwaukee

The Bucks Making Big Bucks for Milwaukee
Written By: Alex B.


The Milwaukee Bucks have been on a tear this year in the NBA, this has been a great thing for sports fans and for Milwaukee's economy. The Bucks have been on a historic run this year making it the furthest they have sense the 2000-2001 season. This has caused a economic rise for the city of milwaukee, restaurants, hotels, shops, and ride sharing services have all been benefiting from the Bucks historic run. It has been estimated that each game is bringing in $3 million in economic impact.



The further the bucks go into their playoff run more and more money will be heading towards Milwaukee's economy. It has been estimated that if the Bucks make it to the NBA finals the city of Milwaukee could make a average of $12 million per-game. All in all Bucks basketball isn't just great for the fans right now but for Milwaukee's economy too and i'm sure both Bucks fans and the people of Milwaukee can appreciate the positive externalities created by the Bucks.



Boeder , Alex. “10 Numbers From The Series-Clinching Win.” NBA.com , 2019, www.nba.com/bucks/features/boeder-10-numbers-from-series-clinching-win.
Miston , Bill. 9 May 2019.


Friday, May 10, 2019

Economic Effects on Nashville After the NFL Draft

Economic Effects on Nashville After the NFL Draft
Written by: Logan Evers

The NFL draft is not only a large way for the host city to bring in revenue, but furthermore it positively impacts the economy. Nashville, Tennessee was chosen to host the draft among other finalists during the NFL Spring League Meeting in 2018. Nashville proved to be a great choice as the streets were filled and NFL found themselves with a record breaking attendance. 600,000 people showed up and this will prove beneficial to their economy. As people attend the demand for goods and services go up. This not only helps local businesses but it encourages business expansion, it may allow businesses the extra funds to invest in new products. This can lead to an increase in long run aggregate supply because when there is investment in goods and services like infrastructure it positively will impact the economy for long periods of time.

Another impact the draft can have on the city of Nashville is that overall 47.5 million people tuned in digitally. This means that the city was publicized to every one of the 47.5 million who watched. It may lead to more tourism and long term revenue for the city because people will see the benefits of traveling to Nashville. The Tennessee Titans are also likely to gain more support after the draft. People are able to see their state and what they stand for and will empathize with them and in turn lead to more game sales.

Overall the state of Tennessee will benefit from the NFL draft in Nashville because it will drive up tourism and lead to more business growth. The economy will benefit from the increase in aggregate demand and in the long run the increase in investment will drive up economic growth.


Works Cited
“NFL Draft 2019: Nashville Crowds Break Event Record for Attendance.” NFL Draft: Nashville Crowds Break Attendance Record | Sporting News, (Getty Images), 29 Apr. 2019, www.sportingnews.com/us/nfl/news/nfl-draft-2019-nashville-crowds-break-event-record-for-attendance/152ssgmzgw4ic1mrybnnv67axz.

Rau, Nate, et al. “How Nashville Got the 2019 NFL Draft: From NFL Afterthought to Host of Its Biggest Party.” The Tennessean, Nashville Tennessean, 19 Apr. 2019, www.tennessean.com/story/sports/nfl/draft2019/2019/04/16/how-2019-nfl-draft-got-to-nashville/3490406002/.

Tuesday, May 7, 2019

Donald Trump and American Economic Growth

Donald Trump and American Economic Growth
Written by Nick Howard

In the wake of the most recent jobs report, from April 2019, one can again see great examples of the continuing growth of the United States’ economy and the benefits to producers and consumers that the Trump Administration’s policies have reaped. Beyond political debates, there has been very steady job growth, wage growth, unemployment decline, and economic growth overall that have been consequences of the policy of this administration. I believe that this deregulatory, pro-business, pro-consumer type of policy is incredibly beneficial to the American people and it will continue to benefit them for the near future.
In a 2016 interview just hours after the presidential election results were announced, Paul Krugman, economics expert and writer for the New York Times said himself, “We are very probably looking at a global recession, with no end in sight.” Mark Cuban, a wealthy business owner, namely of the professional basketball team Dallas Mavericks, proclaimed, “In the event Donald wins, I have no doubt in my mind the market tanks.”(“Breitbart News Network.”) It is quite interesting to me how exactly sure these people can be that someone would absolutely destroy an economy by embracing the free-market. So what happened?

Well, it’s no secret they were wrong - about as wrong as one can possibly be indeed. Upon entering office, consumer confidence jumped to its highest level since 2000. GDP has grown at a steady three-plus percent rate since 2016. Unemployment for women is at its lowest since 1953; african americans record low, latino lowest ever. There have been an average 213,000 in monthly job gains over the past year. Overall the unemployment rate is at its lowest since 1969. Donald Trump took many steps in having less government regulation - cut economic regulation by 74% after his first year in office compared to the year previous(“Trump Has Set Economic Growth on Fire. Here Is How He Did It.”).
In even bigger news, the April jobs report was released this past week by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and even more growth was seen. It boasted a whopping 263,000 more jobs added along with 3.2 percent GDP growth in the first quarter of 2019. The other component of economic growth and recovery was a 3.2 percent increase in hourly earnings over the past year(“U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.”). Not only is GDP growing steadily, but so are wages for hard-working Americans overall. It’s important to note that if nominal wages rise, there will be less output and less GDP growth - but if there is a steady increase in wages that is not too rapid that would cause major inflation or a decrease in output, it benefits both the producer and consumer. These are, in fact, the best wage gains since the recession ended in 2009 - or in other words, we hit a trough in the business cycle in 2009 and recovery has been great recently.
Above all, Donald Trump passed incredible corporate tax-cuts that slashed the corporate tax rate in America from 35 percent, down to 21 percent. The kicker here is that businesses are able to keep a whole lot more of their profits - there was a surge in corporate profits - and produced a trickle down effect from these tax cuts that extremely benefits the consumer. If producers are able to keep more of their profits, it allows them to have more producer surplus beyond their costs of production, and can charge lower prices and pay higher wages in order to benefit or trickle money down to the consumer - where they would have more consumer surplus. This is exactly what Trump was going for and it is seen with a nice growth in wages and less of an increase in price level. In terms of Keynesian Economics, the Trump administration has used fiscal policy action in order to not only stabilize the economy - but allow it to thrive. By cutting business taxes by 14%, business owners now have more money to invest in new technology and equipment(i.e. Capital goods) and therefore increase long-term potential output, or GDP growth. Increases in investment spending and consumer spending(due to an increase in consumer confidence and a subsequent decrease in taxes) are direct influencers of a country’s GDP and would stimulate more growth in the short-run and potential growth in the long-run.

Many critics have raised the question of how sustainable this economic growth under the Trump administration is. It is true that during the business cycle of the free market, growing economics do see a peak, and then fall into recession where they reach a trough, or a low point, and proceed to run it all over again. But, I believe that since this growth has been steady, the economy will just keep growing and thriving where it’s at until there are significant regulatory measures to slow it down or stop it - which isn’t happening soon. In fact, the Federal Reserve is at a point where it does not want to take any monetary policy action because the economy is growing so steadily. They do not want to conduct open-market operations or anything else to manipulate the target federal funds rate in the short-run because they are at a point where they don’t need to and will “wait and see”(“US Job Growth Surges in April, Beating Expectations with 263,000 Added.”). The labor market in america is also growing at a healthy pace so people will be ready to step up to these new jobs added.


In the end, the Trump Administration’s economic policies have benefited the United States so much because they have been embracing free market capitalism more than any administration since Ronald Reagan in the 1980’s. By cutting many regulations that put pressure on businesses, lowering taxes, and adding jobs, they have been truly making the most of an economic system that has made the most money for the most people out of any other country in the history of the world. The growth has been so great that former president, and big Donald Trump critic, Barack Obama was taking credit for the economic growth since 2016, saying in a speech, “By the time I left office … the economy was growing. And by the way that growth has just kept on going…Right now Republicans are all ‘Look the economy’s so good’, Where do you think that started? When did that start?”(“Obama Swats Trump and the GOP for Taking Credit for Economic Growth.). Quite frankly, after a slow recovery from recession, it’s hard to credit oneself for a surge in consumer and business confidence, after leaving office - not to mention a litany of other records set since 2016. In essence, business is booming in the United States of America, and there are no signs of letting up - thanks to some economic policy that has Made the Economy Great Again.




Works Cited
Breitbart News. “Breitbart News Network.” Breitbart, 6 May 2019, www.breitbart.com/.

Henney, Megan. “US Job Growth Surges in April, Beating Expectations with 263,000 Added.” Fox Business, Fox Business, 3 May 2019, www.foxbusiness.com/economy/april-jobs-report.

JeffCoxCNBCcom. “Trump Has Set Economic Growth on Fire. Here Is How He Did It.” CNBC, CNBC, 7 Sept. 2018, www.cnbc.com/2018/09/07/how-trump-has-set-economic-growth-on-fire.html.

Oprysko, Caitlin. “Obama Swats Trump and the GOP for Taking Credit for Economic Growth.”

POLITICO, 2 Nov. 2018, www.politico.com/story/2018/11/02/obama-trump-economy-republicans-
959046.

“U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.” U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, www.bls.gov/.

Friday, May 3, 2019

Tesla Announces Ride Sharing App

Tesla Announces Ride Sharing App
Nate Tollenaar


In character with their long history of announcing things that seem like dreams and likely won’t be accomplished as quickly as they say they will, Tesla has announced an opportunity to use your car as a pseudo-taxi service... when you aren’t using it. Much like Uber and Lyft that offer the ability to pay others to drive you places, this does something similar, enables you to get paid for moving someone from point A to point B. However, used in conjunction with their self-driving technology, you may not need to be in the car. Unlike Uber and Lyft, which require you to physically be driving a car, you could be making money while sitting at a desk at work or reading a book at home. Not only would this car provide a significantly better option for saving the environment (provided we actually start producing electricity in a greener manner) but it would literally pay for itself after a while. This could considerably shift the market and have a significant impact on the economy. With such a useful concept with a significant return to the buyer, this service could potentially drive the economy away from buying gasoline cars and provide significant competition for Uber and Lyft, especially since it removes one of the most complained about parts of both of those services, the driver. Tesla, being an american-based company, could potentially add millions or billions of dollars to the US economy should they complete this before other companies can create similar self-driving cars. Especially given the prevalence of foreign car companies like Honda, Toyota and Mercedez-Benz in the US economy, these cars could potentially corner the market for a short time. Not only would this change the imports of the US slightly, it would significantly increase exports as these cars would undoubtedly be sold all around the world. Furthermore, this service could prove to increase employment within the US as repairs unique to electric cars become more prevalent, the increased profits enable Tesla to fund more research and development, both on the mechanical and programming aspects of their vehicles and of course, we’ll need factory workers to at least make sure the cars are manufactured properly. All in all, this development could put the US at the top of the automobile food chain and provide a significant increase to the economy of the US.

Works Cited
Tesla, Inc, www.tesla.com/presskit#autopilot.

McFarland, Matt. “Elon Musk Says Tesla Will Have Robo-Taxis Operating next Year.” CNN, Cable News Network, 22 Apr. 2019, www.cnn.com/2019/04/22/tech/tesla-robotaxis/index.html.

Thursday, May 2, 2019

How does Immigration affect GDP?

How does Immigration affect GDP?
Aparna Mandapaka

Immigration is considered as one of the major and important topics in the United States. As Donald Trump got elected as the president of the United States the immigration became severe and terrifying. He nearly deported half a million people back to their homeland last year. Most people support President Donald Trump’s ideas because they believe that allowing more immigrants into the United States would put their jobs at risk and they think that as we hire high skilled and high experienced people from different countries the natives would lose job opportunities and lose demand in the market. But allowing more immigrants into the United States would have a huge benefit because they help in creating more workspace and also help in boosting up the economy. Immigrants contribute to the economy and GDP by paying taxes, immigrants pay more taxes than Americans. According to the National Immigration Forum, “Immigrants pay taxes and spend money in local economies. Without these important economic contributions from immigrants, the U.S. economy would be smaller, and government at all levels would see revenues decline without the taxes paid by immigrants.” Immigration brings benefits to the U.S. economy through the help of their taxes, immigrants taxes benefit retired people and other Americans like college students by the government providing them scholarships.

Immigrants also help in increasing the GDP by impacting on the labor market. As we hire more immigrants they work more hours, which means they worked more hours in the economy. Working more hours would help the economy because if you are in a job and working it means less unemployment when the government calculates the unemployment rate. When you are working for government doesn’t check if you are a citizen or immigrant(but you have to have legal working permit) they just want to know do you work or not and how many hours you worked because if there is less unemployment it means that the country is doing good and has a good economic condition. According to ProPublica, Adam Ozimek and Mark Zandi at Moody’s Analytics, “an independent economics firm, estimated that for every 1 percent increase in U.S. population made of immigrants, GDP rises 1.15 percent. So a simple way to get to Trump’s 4 percent GDP bump? Take in about 8 million net immigrants per year. To show you what that really looks like, we’ve charted the effect below. You can see for yourself what might happen to the economy if we increased immigration to the highest rates in history or dropped it to zero – and everything in between.” In recent interviews, President Donald Trump stated that he would increase GDP at least 3.5 - 4%, but he might not reach his goal if he stops legal immigrants from entering into the United States and deporting them. If there are fewer immigrants in the United States means that they are fewer taxes being paid, when there are fewer taxes being paid it means that the economic growth is decreasing






If we compare these two graphs, you can see that one million immigrants would maintain GDP at 2%, because as the immigrants come into America they pay local taxes which is 8% of their salary. If we compare the graph that has five million immigrants we can see that the GDP increased between 3 to 4 percent. They are receiving at least eight percent from each individuals salary, and more taxes are being paid so the GDP increases..

In conclusion, another way immigrants boost up GDP and economy by paying their kid's college fees. Most immigrant children are considered as international students in college, which means that they pay double amount than the out state fee. Since they are the international student they are not eligible or receive any type of government fundings like scholarships. Since they pay double amount this would go towards government spending, which is eventually used for boosting up the economy and would go as pension for retired people.


Works Cited
Groeger, Lena. “The Immigration Effect: There's a Way for President Trump to Boost the Economy by Four Percent, But He Probably Won't Like It.” ProPublica, 19 July 2017, projects.propublica.org/graphics/gdp.

“Immigrants as Economic Contributors: Immigrant Tax Contributions and Spending Power.” National Immigration Forum, immigrationforum.org/article/immigrants-as-economic-contributors-immigrant-tax-contributions-and-spending-power/.

“Immigrants as Economic Contributors: Immigrant Tax Contributions and Spending Power.” National Immigration Forum, immigrationforum.org/article/immigrants-as-economic-contributors-immigrant-tax-contributions-and-spending-power/.

Does Russell Wilson Deserve to be the highest paid Player in the NFL?

Does Russell Wilson Deserve to be the highest Player In the NFL?
Ryan Szewczyk

Quarterback is the most important position in the NFL. Therefore quarterbacks are the highest paid players in the NFL. Last week on April 19th former Wisconsin badger Russell Wilson signed the richest deal in NFL history. Adding another four seasons with Seattle and $140 million in new money. Wilson will be under contract through 2023 and he will be getting paid 35 million dollars per year starting this upcoming season. Not to mention the eye opening 65 million dollar signing bonus. Wilson’s signing bonus was 9 million dollars more than Aaron Rodgers. Which most people think Arron is the better of the two. So does he deserve to be the highest paid player in the NFL


When you think of top quarterbacks in the NFL you think of names like Brees, Brady and Rodgers, not Russell Wilson. Don’t get me wrong he is an above average quarterback but he doesn’t deserve to be the highest paid. Wilson has won one super bowl in 2013 and has not been back to the Conference championship since 2014. Last season the Seahawks went 10-6 and lost to the Cowboys in the wildcard. According to Footballrefernece.com Wilson was 20th in the league in total pass completions, 18th in total yards and 19th in completion percentage. He was3rd in touchdowns thrown but that still isn’t the numbers you want for the highest paid quarterback in the NFL. Wilson’s greatest asset as a quarterback is his ability to extend plays with his feet. No quarterback has rushed for more yards since 2012 than he has, but those playmaking instincts often get him into trouble. Despite dropping back the fewest times among regular quarterbacks over the last three seasons, Wilson has taken the second-most sacks in the NFL.

Granted, Wilson’s interception percentage has been 2.5 percent or lower but he hasn’t been expected to throw it much either. In 56 career games, he has attempted 30 or more passes just 15 times.Wilson has been assisted by a superior and bludgeoning defense for his entire career. It also helps that he’s got Marshawn Lynch in his backfield. When the Seahawks won the superbowl in 2013 Seattle had the best defense in the NFL and he only threw for 206 yards.

To conclude on one hand, it’s hard to argue against Wilson’s value as a winner, and he certainly has all the intangibles  like  leadership, character, poise to give out an elite quarterback contract. The numbers, however, tell the story of a good but not great quarterback, who probably shouldn’t get the top-of-the-market money that is reserved for the absolute best players in the league.

Augmented Realty, the Next Revolutionary Technology?

Augmented Reality, the Next Revolutionary Technology?
Author: Dominic Leonard

What’s the first thing that comes to mind when you think of the future? Flying cars that automatically drive, virtual reality, robots, do any of these ideas pop up? Most likely yes. While some of these technologies are just a figment of the imagination, some of them are real, and very well could be used by the public today, or in the upcoming years. We are in an era of rapid technological evolution, and while the public’s opinion may be controversial at best when discussing the future of technology, all these modern technologies are well known. All except one: Augmented reality.

Augmented reality (AR) is when a device takes the existing surroundings around the user, and adds computer generated images to it. This is not to be confused with virtual reality (VR), where a device is used experience an entirely original world with computer generated images. The most popular example of augmented reality is Pokémon Go, which superimposes images on to your surroundings with a phone, but augmented reality can also count as 3D holograms, and some QR codes, as long as it follows the definition. Compared to VR, AR is cheaper at the expense of an immersive experience, but virtual reality’s immersive experience will be exactly what holds it back from being used outside of the video game market, and for specific medical therapies. AR doesn’t limit the user as much as VR because the user can still see their actual surroundings, and the user doesn’t have to use wires and a high quality graphics processing unit to render millions of polygons on screen. Augmented reality is simply more practical than virtual reality.

 Augmented reality can be used for a large variety of purposes to boost the economy. The site eonreality.com suggests that with the lower attention spans today, education could be improved by transitioning from an auditory, lecture based learning style, to a more visual based learning style. (Wouldn’t you agree? School would be a lot more interesting if that was the case.) The site lifewire.com goes even further and suggests many other uses such as military pilots using AR to display necessary information, surgeons using AR to display an overlay, and information when doing a precise surgery to reduce risk of failure. There’s also more conventional uses for AR such as navigation, sightseeing, maintenance and repairs, gaming, and businesses would also benefit with AR advertisements. All of these applications of AR can increase production and efficiency for many different markets, providing certain services also would become a lot easier. The economy’s GDP would grow and the quality of life for most consumers would also improve as a result.
Augmented reality is a useful technology that is overlooked for its simplicity. This technology already works fairly well, and it’s been around for many years at this point. All that really needs to happen is to polish up the technology a little bit more, make sure it’s 100% reliable, and to spread the word. Augmented reality is a great technological step forward just waiting to happen.

Works Cited
Admin. “What Is Augmented Reality (AR)? Ultimate Guide to Augmented Reality (AR) Technology.” Reality Technologies, Reality Technologies, 4 Oct. 2018, www.realitytechnologies.com/augmented-reality/.

“Augmented Reality – The Past, The Present and The Future.” The Interaction Design Foundation, www.interaction-design.org/literature/article/augmented-reality-the-past-the-present-and-the-future.
“How AR and VR Change the Global Economics Conversation.” EON Reality, 12 Sept. 2018, www.eonreality.com/how-ar-and-vr-change-the-global-economics-conversation/.

Perdue, Tim. “All You Wanted to Know About Augmented Reality.” Lifewire, Lifewire, 2 Apr. 2019, www.lifewire.com/applications-of-augmented-reality-2495561.

Ronzio, Jonathan, and Brent Turner. “What Is the Difference Between AR and VR? A Lesson in Altered Realities.” Cramer, Cramer, 24 Feb. 2019, www.cramer.com/story/the-difference-between-ar-and-vr/.

The War on Drugs and Legalizing Pot

The War on Drugs and Legalizing Pot
Marissa Ziolkowski

If you closely followed the 2018 midterm election in Wisconsin, it will come as to no shock that 59% of voters, 70% of voters, 77% of voters respectively in Racine, Milwaukee, and Waukesha Counties said they would support the legalization of recreational marijuana in Wisconsin (“Wisconsin”). And, as someone myself who acknowledges that people are going to use marijuana recreationally regardless of the legality of it, I am left to wonder: if so many people support the legalization of pot in Wisconsin, why haven’t we done so yet? Ultimately, from an economic and social standpoint, the legalization of recreational marijuana just makes sense.


As seen by this graphic, public approval of legalizing recreational marijuana is not endemic to Wisconsin.

As previously mentioned, we have marijuana users in our state as we speak because, despite it being illegal in Wisconsin, people continue to use the drug. Seeing as it is a drug that is near impossible to overdose on and is not as dangerous as alcohol (Villa)--a drug we in Wisconsin near condone the over-serving of--marijuana should be a good we tax in Wisconsin. Our state (and hopefully, one day, our country) can take a good that is being used regularly by its citizens and make a profit off of it while introducing regulation on the drug to limit the lacing of marijuana with more harmful, addictive substances. By legalizing marijuana, small businesses related to dispensaries or pot paraphernalia can begin to thrive, and justice more easily served to those who sell tainted products. For example, in August of 2018, Colorado was ranked first when comparing states’ economies (“States”). This ranking came after Colorado’s legalization of pot in 2014--and while it is unfair to attribute their entire thriving economy on their marijuana sales, I would be remiss to say it didn’t help.

Additionally, the war on drugs has not been cheap for the American people. An estimate has put the federal government of the United States at $1 trillion spent on the incarceration of illegal drug possession or use since 1971. Not only would the legalization bring in money to our governments, with tax revenue raking in anywhere from $2.4 billion to $6 billion annually, depending on how it is taxed--but also, would save the federal government about $7.7 billion annually, as by legalizing pot, you reduce the number of people who are committing a crime (Edwards).  Taxpayers are paying for the incarceration of nonviolent “criminals” currently, which is quite honestly, a waste of money.

The legalization of marijuana would also improve the social health of our nation, as unfortunately, racism is present in our legal system. This is no question, as from the excess of police brutality shown towards minorities to the sentences received for the same exact crime between minorities and whites, the racism present in our system has been proved time and time again. “[D]espite accounting for only 12.5 percent of all substance users, black Americans make up nearly 30 percent of all drug-related arrests” (Pearl). Justice is not being fairly served, as marijuana arrests appear to be just another vehicle for delivering unjust sentences to minorities.

All in all, while change can be scary, it is the key to progression--as a nation and as an economy. Legalizing recreational marijuana is heavily supported in Wisconsin, and after seeing the benefits of the legalization, I believe it is time to listen to the people.

Works Cited
Edwards, Ezekiel, and Rebecca McCray. “Hundreds of Economists: Marijuana Prohibition Costs Billions, Legalization Would Earn Billions.” American Civil Liberties Union, American Civil Liberties Union, 9 July 2018, www.aclu.org/blog/smart-justice/sentencing-reform/hundreds-economists-marijuana-prohibition-costs-billions?redirect=blog%2Fmass-incarceration%2Fhundreds-economists-marijuana-prohibition-costs-billions-legalization-would.

Hartig, Hannah, and Abigail Geiger. “62% Of Americans Favor Legalizing Marijuana.” Pew Research Center, Pew Research Center, 8 Oct. 2018, www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/10/08/americans-support-marijuana-legalization/.

Pearl, Betsy. “Ending the War on Drugs: By the Numbers.” Center for American Progress, 27 June 2018, www.americanprogress.org/issues/criminal-justice/reports/2018/06/27/452819/ending-war-drugs-numbers/.

“States with the Best and Worst Economies.” USA Today, Gannett Satellite Information Network, 27 Aug. 2018, www.usatoday.com/picture-gallery/money/economy/2018/08/23/states-with-the-best-and-worst-economies/37490719/.

Villa, Lauren. “Marijuana vs Alcohol | Is Marijuana Safer Than Alcohol?” DrugAbuse.com, American Addiction Centers, 21 Dec. 2016, drugabuse.com/marijuana-vs-alcohol/.

“Wisconsin Election Results: Governor, Senate and Other Seats up for Grabs.” Wisconsin Election Results: 2018 Midterm Live Results | Journal Sentinel, Journal Sentinel Online, 7 Nov. 2018, projects.jsonline.com/topics/election/2018/11/6/november-2018-wisconsin-general-election-results.html.

Wednesday, May 1, 2019

Why Protectionism Is Toxic

Why Protectionism Is Toxic
Written By: Miriam John

The one rebuttal to this argument that I know everyone has is, “But we want to protect American jobs!” and I absolutely agree, but trading with other countries should not be equated to outsourcing. When you look at countries like England, which is an isolated island (resourcefully speaking) located towards the northern hemisphere, their entire economy and country would collapse if they tried to depend on themselves for produce, oil and other resources and goods their land cannot provide to the quantity that they need. In 2017, England earned about $395 billion in exports, but juxtaposed by the whopping $617 billion that they spent on imports you can clearly see they have a great trade imbalance. Yet, their unemployment rate as of 2018 was 4.2% which is around the natural rate of unemployment. Compare that to our export earnings of $1.25 trillion and import spending of $2.16 trillion, it’s easy to see that the trend is that well functioning, first world countries naturally import about double what they export (in dollars) considering our unemployment rate was at 4.0% as of June 2018. But limiting free trade and enticing trade wars can only destroy that.

In my opinion, the real reason protectionism has gotten so popular lately is not because it would actually strengthen our economy, but because of xenophobia. It’s easy to blame any of our economic problems on another country instead of making internal changes to our system because creating fear is easier than instilling hope. It’s easy to blame China, with whom we trade extremely often for goods that are far too expensive to make here, for the fact in 2017, our poverty rate was about 12.3%. That meant about 39.7 million Americans lived below the poverty line. Nothing about this statistic is good and I do believe we need to take measures to improve this situation, but putting higher tariffs on foreign goods that we depend on is not the answer.

Of course I realize there are downsides to excessive trading. Perhaps it is more humane to purchase products domestically if you are worried about sweatshop labor, but the reality is that we have laws in place to prohibit illegally made goods and/or products produced of child labor from being imported into our country to be sold. The only way that you would be supporting inhumane labor is if you yourself bought from the individual company/country that utilizes these methods. But the government will not currently stop you from buying cheap clothes from that online Chinese website because those goods are not being imported by the government in bulk. Another downside is that we may become too dependent on other countries, but there is always a happy medium. We obviously cannot rely on ourselves to produce certain goods at an effective price and quantity, but if we rely on other countries, we will be at their mercy if they decide to withhold those goods from us. But if we approach it as we are currently approaching oil, we can buy cheaper oil from the Middle East but build our oil reserves domestically and slowly work it into our economy so as not to overwhelm gas prices but to also be less dependent on the OPEC countries. But were we to raise tariffs on imported oil, prices in the U.S for gas would soar and we would not be able to afford OPEC oil but we would not have the resources to provide the entire country with oil. You can actually see in these pictures that we export a lot of the same things we import, which contributes to the trade balance in a positive way. Other countries are just as dependent for our cars as we are for their cars etc. thus we can make the products that are more efficient for us to make and we can buy similar products based on tastes and preferences that may not be as efficient for us to make.





All in all, extreme protectionism is truly bad for our economy and will actually reduce our GDP, if you consider recent news about the many factories in various industries that shut down/laid off workers because the price of steel is currently too high with the tariffs the Trump administration currently has in place. Ultimately, workers will pay the price for the costs that corporations have to shoulder and that will damage our economy more than restore it, thus we should shift our focus to more free trade and perfecting our trade balance to a healthier level.

Works Cited

Ikenson, Daniel J. “Protectionism and Trade Barriers Aren't Just Bad Economics – They're Also Immoral.” Cato Institute, 10 May 2018, www.cato.org/publications/commentary/protectionism-trade-barriers-arent-just-bad-economics-theyre-also-immoral.

Pensions, Department for Work and. “Employment Rate Remains at Record High.” GOV.UK, GOV.UK, 12 June 2018, www.gov.uk/government/news/employment-rate-remains-at-record-high.

Petersen, Thieß. “US Protectionism Is Bad for Everyone, Especially for America Itself.” Euractiv.com, EURACTIV.com, 14 Sept. 2017, www.euractiv.com/section/economy-jobs/opinion/us-protectionism-is-bad-for-everyone-especially-for-america-itself/.

“United Kingdom.” OEC - United Kingdom (GBR) Exports, Imports, and Trade Partners, atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/gbr/.

“United States.” OEC - United States (USA) Exports, Imports, and Trade Partners, atlas.media.mit.edu/en/profile/country/usa/.

“United States Unemployment Rate.” United States Unemployment Rate | 2019 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast, tradingeconomics.com/united-states/unemployment-rate.

US Census Bureau. “Income and Poverty in the United States: 2017.” Income and Poverty in the United States: 2017, 16 Apr. 2019, www.census.gov/library/publications/2018/demo/p60-263.html.

The Potential of the AfCFTA

The Potential of the AfCFTA
Benjamin Bucheger

AP Econ A4


In March of 2018 the leaders from 44 African nations met in Kigali, Rwanda, committing to launching a common market for Africa. The African Continental Free Trade Agreement (or AfCFTA or CFTA for short) is not something that average American thinks about or maybe even knows about. But this agreement that would create the largest continental trade-bloc for goods and services in the world is arguably the biggest story in international economics to date. In order to stay informed let’s get into the finer details of what the CFTA is and what it plans to do.

The CFTA intends to bring together the markets of all 55 AU member states covering a population of 1.2 billion people with a collective GDP of $3.4 trillion. Further it seeks to boost intra-African trade through trade liberalization allowing the free movement of local businesses, investment and people. Better coordination between governments and businesses through this international economic forum will also resolve disputes that arise from membership in multiple smaller trade unions (such as the Economic Community of Central African States or the EC of West African States). The hope is these goals will enhance competitiveness, market interaction, and effectively deal with a century old problem caused by colonialism - impediment to trade and economic development due to an overemphasis on raw materials. Despite the potential of growth for the African economy there are still some points of disagreement amongst African nations mainly dealing with execution.

The goals will be accomplished through several measures. The CFTA consolidated text itself is split into two phases. The first (currently underway) deals with the trades in goods & services and dispute settlements. The second phase (to be concluded in 2020) will cover investment, intellectual property rights, and competition policy. The part I’m going to focus on - included in phase 1 - is the progressive reduction of tariff and non-tariff barriers.

According to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development a Full Trade Agreement (that is, eliminating all tariffs) could generate welfare gains of $16.1 billion at the cost of $4.1 billion in tariff revenue loss. At the same time GDP and employment are projected to grow 0.97% and 1.17% respectively. Intra-African trade is estimated to grow by 33% and the trade deficit across the continent would decrease by 50.9%.

On the other hand if African nations instead go to a Special Product Categorization model (exempting sensitive products from trade liberalization) in order to appease nation-states with concerns towards a FTA, more on that later, welfare gain would decrease to $10.7 billion in the long term. Tariff revenue loss would also decrease to $3.2 billion. Meanwhile GDP and employment are expected to grow by 0.66% and 0.82% respectively. Intra-African trade would still grow, but only by 24% and the trade deficit would only decrease by 3.8%. Though the SPC option seems worse on the surface the draw to such a model for nations at odds with the CFTA, such as Nigeria or Burundi, is that it appears to address concerns over a lack of protection for local industry in a completely liberalized market. There is also concern that the agreement favors larger nations that already have a somewhat industrialized economy while leaving smaller nations behind without proper incentives to invest in them. However, nations who refuse to sign the CFTA are outliers and as of this month 52 nations have signed the agreement. The more contentious part of the agreement, which only 29 nations have signed, is the Free Movement Protocol.

As the name suggests, the protocol allows the free movement of people, right to live and establish businesses anywhere in Africa. Despite its less than ideal support the FMP is the backbone of the CFTA as free movement improves the interconnectivity between African businesses by lessening the cost of and time it takes to cross borders. The reason certain nations don’t support the protocol, such as Tanzania, is due to concerns over potential mass immigration to more wealthy nations with an inability to properly manage these immigrants. This mainly applies to fears over job loss of citizens due to overcrowding in the job market. Francis Mangeni, director for Trade, Customs, and Monetary Affairs for the Common Market for Eastern and Southern Africa, puts it best why these fears are unwarranted stating, “Many African states still believe in overblown myths that when they open up to other nationals, it will cause insecurity and jobs will be fewer for their citizens. But they have to look at countries that have successfully done it. Rwanda, Kenya, Seychelles and others opened up their borders and they have not collapsed,” In any case the signing of this protocol by all nations involved will be crucial to the success of the CFTA.

Wrapping up, the AfCFTA will undoubtedly take a lot of work to implement. Participating nations will have to implement minor and major economic reforms to be better responsive to a more liberalized trading system and economy while at the same time putting in place the infrastructure required to fully take advantage of the potential benefits of the CFTA. Furthermore trade agreements between African nations and nations outside of the African continent such as China and the US will have to be renegotiated with the greater African Union. So far 22 countries have ratified the agreement meeting the minimum requirement to bring it into full force. More who have signed are expected to ratify the agreement as phase 1 negotiations continue and more specifics are made available. As you watch the news be sure to keep an ear out for word on the AfCFTA, an agreement that will change the course of African economics for generations to come.

Map of whose signed the AFTCA in March, 2018: 




Works Cited
“Africa Continental Free Trade Area: Benefits, Costs and Implications.” Infomineo, 20 Apr. 2018, infomineo.com/africa-continental-free-trade-area/.

“Africa Wary of Free Movement as Single Market Opens.” The East African, 22 Mar. 2018, www.theeastafrican.co.ke/business/Africa-wary-of-free-movement-as-single-market-opens/2560-4352792-cv2rmfz/index.html.

“African Continental Free Trade Area: What Do We Expect in 2019.” Daily Monitor, 29 Apr. 2019, www.monitor.co.ug/OpEd/Commentary/African-Continental-Free-Trade-Area-What-expect-beyond/689364-5091612-adta3t/index.html.

“Kigali Declaration, 2003.” ACHPR, www.achpr.org/instruments/kigali/.
“THE AFRICA CONTINENTAL FREE TRADE AGREEMENT AND CROSS-BORDER DATA TRANSFER: MAXIMISING THE TRADE DEAL IN THE AGE OF DIGITAL ECONOMY.”

AANoIP, 20 Mar. 2019, aanoip.org/the-africa-continental-free-trade-agreement-and-cross-border-data-transfer-maximising-the-trade-deal-in-the-age-of-digital-economy/.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...