Trump says "Goodbye" to more than 200,000 Immigrants

Connor Neuman
Trump says goodbye to more than 200,000 immigrants

Immigrants play a significant role in our economy. In fact, about 17% or 27 million of the 160 million people in the American labor force is made up of immigrants from all over the world. However, what if I told you that more than 200,000 people are going to be taken out of that labor force. That is exactly what happened recently when president Trump abolished the Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for more than 200,000 immigrants alone from El Salvador and still many more from other countries. Now the real question is if this is the right move to make on an economic standpoint. Although Trump may believe that this was a good decision to make, the abolishment of the TPS for Salvadorans was an extremely poor choice for the economy.

The Temporary Protected Status was a program that temporarily protected immigrants from Central American countries and some Middle Eastern countries from deportation. However, immigrants from El Salvador benefited from this the most since they have a significant amount of immigrants come into the U.S. due to a substantial earthquake there in 2001. As you can see from the graph, immigrants from El Salvador makes up more than 50% of people benefiting from the TPS. A majority of those immigrants are currently living in Los Angeles, Houston, and New York, which are the most populated cities in America. Unfortunately, now that this luxury for Salvadorans was destroyed, they only have one year to leave the U.S. unless they find a legal way to stay.
The main reason why terminating the TPS was a poor choice is that the labor force will take a large toll which will greatly impact our economy. As I mentioned earlier, immigrants make up a huge part in our labor force so if a large amount of them were to leave, then the economy as well as GDP could see a tremendous decrease. Since most immigrants work in manufacturing or construction, the labor force will see a large decrease in the amount of people working in those fields. This would extremely affect our economy since our largest exports are industry and manufacturing so if we were to lose a large amount of employees in those areas, then you would expect to see a decrease in GDP. Additionally, the economy would go into a recession if there was a high unemployment rate, specifically in  industry and manufacturing areas. This would cause the economy to be more expansionary to try and prevent high unemployment. This would force them to decrease reserves, decreases interest rates, and purchase more bonds into order to increase the money supply.
In sum, the abolishment of the TPS will not benefit the U.S. economy whatsoever. In the end, our GDP will most likely decrease which may lead to a recession in our economy. So why would Trump do this? Is it because he doesn’t know the possible long term effects? Or maybe he just doesn’t care, but that is just one problem we need to deal with since he is the president and the boss of this country. All in all, I wish the best the Salvadorans and other nation affected by the extermination of the TPS.

Works Cited
“Frequently Requested Statistics on Immigrants and Immigration in the United States.” Migrationpolicy.org, 6 Apr. 2017, www.migrationpolicy.org/article/frequently-requested-statistics-immigrants-and-immigration-united-states.
“White House Says 200,000 Salvadoreans Must Leave the US.” BBC News, BBC, 8 Jan. 2018, www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-42613178.

The Glory of Movies

The Glory of Movies
Jose de Leon
Who doesn’t love going to the movies the average american goes at least once a month. Movie theaters promote growth in the economy. With huge movies such as Star Wars the Last Jedi that made $220 million domestic landing the second largest opening only beatted by Star Wars the Force Awakens that made $247million. With the flow of money going in and the jobs that it produces help the Economy grow.

In california 142,000 jobs are created, which is more than all the other states combined. With this it helps to know that even with something that provides so much entertainment it also fight something that is a huge problem in the US. In addition movies are in good demand. Just as fans could wait for the new Star Wars movie or for Marvel to release The Black Panther movie. Fans are what helping the economy grow by going to go watch the movie that sometime lead to them buying goods with the logo of the movie of something to do with it. Movies don’t just make money by the audience going to go watch them they are part of a bigger part were the incorrage for them to buy product of the movie.
From my last visit to the movie I spent about $90 alone on buying tickets for my family and another $20 on food this is another thing that some of us do. We are so willing to go and watch a movie that we don’t really care about how much it cost at the time and while we are there we are more will to buy the over priced food. With tickets normally costing $12, and popcorn about $6 and a soda goes for around $5 that is a total of $23 per person.
The movies are a fun place to go and relax to for after a long day who doesn’t just want to sit back relax and enjoy, while helping the economy grow. 
“AMC Concession Prices.” Movie Theater Prices, www.movietheaterprices.com/amc-concession-prices/.
Mpaa.org, www.mpaa.org/u-s-film-and-tv-production-drives-economic-growth-in-every-corner-of-america/.
“The Numbers - Movies Released in 2017.” The Numbers - Where Data and Movies Meet, www.the-numbers.com/movies/year/2017.

A Newborn Idea to Fix Wealth Inequality

Andrew Dempsey 

Econ Blog Post 

A Newborn Idea to Fix Wealth Inequality

It is not an unknown fact that when it comes to wealth in the United States it is not equal but when you look into the statistics, even more, they are staggering. In America, the 1% owns 40% of all of America's wealth and the 1% own half of America’s stocks, bonds, and mutual funds. (politizane). This shows how hard it is for the poor, middle class and even the rich to grow their wealth. In fact, Nearly a third of American households now have $0 in wealth, according to Deutsche Bank. This is the worst it has been since the early 1960s when the US government started to keep this statistic. Many economists have been trying to solve the problem of Wealth Inequality but have not concerned it. However, Darrick Hamilton of The New School and William Darity of Duke University has proposed a start to fix this problem. The idea is that to give every newborn in the country a “Baby Bond” account that would range from $500 to $50,000. Neither the parents or the kids would be able to touch the money until the child turns 18. They could then spend the money on college, buying a house or starting a business. “The key ingredient of how successful you will be in America is how wealthy your family is,” Hamilton says and baby bonds are one way to fix the gap. The proposal would give families who are extremely wealthy $500 and families who are extremely poor would receive $50,000. Hamilton says the average middle-class family will receive $20,000. If Baby Bonds were to go through it would not fix the wealth inequality in this country but it could be a good start. 

Many people would be concerned with how the US would fund this program but  Hamilton has an answer for that. Hamilton estimates that Baby Bonds would cost $80 billion a year which is about 2% of America’s $4 trillion in annual federal government spending. If the plan was to go through Hamilton says it will not be implemented for 18 years so that there could be time to build up a budget for Baby Bonds. 

People of color have also struggled to decrease the gap in wealth inequality in that past years. The median net worth for white family households is 10 times greater than a family of color. Hamilton says “People like to argue if only poor black and Latino families were more responsible and made better decisions than inequality could be dramatically reduced,”   but Hamilton shows examples that do not support this. Most college-educated African Americans have less net wealth than whites who dropped out of high school. Having Baby Bonds would help these people do something with their degree out of college. 

Baby Bonds will not fix all of the problems in wealth inequality but it is worth looking into. With people who are under 55 having less wealth than in past generations, it shows how the middle class is falling behind today and needs a change. This could be one of many solutions to get back on track.  

Works Cited 

Long, Heather. “Economist Proposes Giving Every US Baby $20,000 or More.” Economist Proposes Giving Every US Baby $20,000 or More, 8 Jan. 2018, www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/economist-proposes-giving-every-us-baby-dollar20000-or-more/ar-BBI7yhb.

politizane. “Wealth Inequality in America.” YouTube, YouTube, 20 Nov. 2012, www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnijnsM.

 

New Years Extravaganza

Sammy Lee
Economics
Mr. Reuter
1/2/2018

New Years Extravaganza

Ever since the New Year’s ball drop tradition started in 1907 in Times Square, New Years festivities have not only gained a bigger crowd, earned more profits, and provided more employment, but it has also become a greater part of our culture. The ball has dropped 107 times except for 1942 and 1943 when the ceremony was suspended due to WWII “dimout” lighting restrictions in New York City. The number of people that watch the ball drop from a tv is over one billion across the globe, and 1,000,000+ are expected to be in Times Square on New Year’s Eve this year. Ever since the beginning New Years is a very influential day for our economy because of the profit, employment, and attendance that takes place annually.

Times Square is universally known as a high population area and when people picture Times Square they see bright lights and advertisements all around them. Advertising is one of the main money incomes for that area all year. “It costs between $1.1 and $4 million a year to buy advertising space in Times Square, and many of the electronic billboards feature flashy lights, high-definition LED displays and catchy graphics in order to capture the attention of the people walking below” (Investopedia). Those who purchase the billboard spaces not only get to show their ads to about 50,000 people every day, but to over 1 million on New Years eve night. This is a very large cost but the profit that is made it outweighs that cost. This advertising payment isn’t the only large payment in New York. It is said, but not confirmed, that if there was a number value on it the annual ball drop costs over $1 million each year alone.

Because of the world renowned New Years celebration over a hundred jobs are created just to keep the event running; therefore, boosting employment. It takes people to build the ball. It takes people to clean up the 3,000+ pounds of confetti throughout the city, and the 48 tons of garbage left on the streets. Even with hundreds of people working to clean the city it takes an average of 7 hours to reopen the streets. There were “178 sanitation workers using 26 mechanical sweepers, 25 collection trucks, 38 blows and 40 hand brooms to tidy up Times Square” (6sqft). These are the obvious economic benefits, but there are 2,688 Waterford crystals in the ball, and they’re made in Ireland and then shipped into the US. This creates imports and connections between other countries.

All in all, New Years celebrations may be a lot of fun, but New Years is a very worthwhile event for our economy due to the profit, employment, and attendance. With all the jobs it’s created and the profit being made at this time, it has a positive impact on our economy.



Works Cited

Pham, Diane. “New Year's Eve in numbers: Facts for the Times Square ball drop.” 6sqft, 26 Dec. 2017, www.6sqft.com/new-years-eve-in-numbers-fun-facts-about-the-times-square-ball-drop/.
“Times Square Ball.” Wikipedia, Wikimedia Foundation, 31 Dec. 2017,
“The Times Square Ball Drop and the Story Behind this New Year's Eve Tradition.” America Comes Alive, 27 Dec. 2017, americacomesalive.com/2013/12/29/the-times-square-ball-drop-and-the-story-behind-this-new-years-eve-tradition/.
CBS/AP. “New Year's Eve revelers flock to see Times Square ball drop.” CBS News, CBS Interactive, 31 Dec. 2017, www.cbsnews.com/news/new-years-eve-revelers-flock-to-see-times-square-ball-drop-mariah-carey/.

Post-Christmas Sales

Post-Christmas Sales
Lexi Blaser

After Christmas is the time for retailers to quickly exchange their holiday decor for sale signs to advertise the new big sales to wrap up the december necessities. Retail stores are seeking to increase the demand for the remaining products they have in stock in hopes to clean out the supply, and then be able to restock for the new sale seasons in the future. Also, 38% of Americans agree this is a time for all holiday shoppers to return or purchase items they may have or did not received over the holidays. Overall, the days following Christmas are known for the determined shoppers that are seeking to obtain the items they desire, and with the help of post holiday sales, it is deceivingly believed that these products may be obtained.

What most consumers that shop on the few days after Christmas do not understand is that these sale opportunities come with opportunity cost; by anxiously needing to purchase an item you did not receive on Christmas, reality is that by purchasing this item, you are not receiving the quality you paid for. Sales presented by companies can be deceiving due to the advertisements of the cheap quality purchases that can be made, but the trade-offs can be significant. When purchasing sale products, these products are not of the quality they are believed to be; most companies trick you into purchasing items that may be old, overstock, soon on the clearance list, turnaround gift return/exchanges, items not in the correct size or products not in the best shape (lifewire.com). But once purchases are made, there is no going back to return because most items are considered “final sales”. The crazed holiday spirit is used against consumers, supporting the total amount per American to be spent on December 26th to be near $186, rather than conserving the money the have gotten on Christmas, they are drawn into spending it because an item was “on sale”.

Companies rely on the few days after christmas to increase december sales and create a larger profit. It is looked upon as a competitive time between companies to see who can get rid of the most sale items, and then quickly transfer into their next sales season. This attraction has been proven to be similar to Black Friday. As shown in the graph, sales present on December 26th are slightly greater than sales present on Black Friday. As explained by forbes.com, compared to the 45% of Americans to shop on Black Friday, 66% are predicted to shop on December 26th. Proving the effect these manipulative post-Christmas sales have on consumers.

Next time you're seeking those post holiday sale, take the time to analyze the products you're purchasing and the quality of the sale. In the end, retail companies are using these sales to their benefit, and tricking consumers to use their money to help support their efforts to become a primary company of consumption.


Leinbach-Reyhle, Nicole. “The Day After Christmas May Surpass Black Friday In Sales And Success This Holiday Season.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 18 Dec. 2015, www.forbes.com/sites/nicoleleinbachreyhle/2015/12/18/new-black-friday/#23d44ef22054.

Montaldo, Donna L. “Score Deep Discounts at After-Christmas Sales.” The Balance, www.thebalance.com/after-christmas-sales-rush-4120601.

Silva, Robert. “After-Christmas Sales and Clearance Shopping Tips.” Lifewire, www.lifewire.com/clearance-after-christmas-sales-1845695.

How Trump’s Tax Plan Affects The Economy

Patrick Cullen

Mrs. Straub 

AP Economics

1 January 2018

How Trump’s Tax Plan Affects The Economy

Just over a week ago, President Trump signed off on a new tax plan for the nation. The two main impacts of the bill are that the income tax on the average consumer will fall and standard deduction will double. Though the income tax will be falling and inevitably enhance consumer confidence, the doubling of standard deduction will negatively impact other markets such as the real estate industry. So does the new tax plan negatively affect the market or will it help improve it? There are clearly both benefits and drawbacks to this new plan, so let’s review them more closely. 

The first of the two main impacts is the cut on the income tax rates. Every employed working class american contributes to the income tax. It is probably one of the most bitter taxes that americans pay considering it takes away from our well earned money, so many of America’s consumers will be quite excited to see that they will acquire a bit more revenue due to the bill. This is not only good for the individual consumers, but also for the market as a whole. In an article about consumer confidence during holiday shopping, Mark Tepper wrote, “So far, holiday spending has been strong, which bodes well for the strength of the consumer. In November alone, retail sales were up 5.8 percent year over year, and Mastercard is projecting that we'll see the strongest holiday season sales growth since 2010, which should surpass 5 percent year-over-year growth”(Tepper). This shows that the lowered income tax instilled on consumers will give them more of an incentive to buy and bring more money into certain markets. This is a prime example of how the tax bill will benefit the overall economy.

Though the income tax will be falling and inevitably enhance consumer confidence, the doubling of standard deduction will negatively impact other markets such as the real estate industry. Most everyone has budget no matter how high or low for annual necessities and expenses. When the price goes up for something then the opportunity cost of purchasing it is that you have less money to spend on something else that you may need. What this does is hurts the market of that other potential product that you could have bought because it takes revenue away. The doubling of standard deduction does just this. In an article about the effects of the new plan, Kimberly Amadeo wrote, “The National Association of Home Builders and the National Association of Realtors opposed this. As more taxpayers take a standard deduction, fewer would take advantage of the mortgage interest deduction”(Amadeo). This shows a negative impact because the doubling of the standard deduction will cause consumers to not take advantage of other deductions in markets such as real estate. The doubling of deduction is a negative externality to the real-estate market.

Overall the plan is supposed to benefit our overall economy, but you can’t make progress without drawbacks. The plan will benefit your average consumer because it will give the consumers more incentive to buy due to the income tax cuts. On the other hand there will also be a drawback to the increase in deductions. So even though it is going to benefit the average consumer, it negatively affects certain industries.

Works Cited

Amadeo, Kimberly. “What to Do Now to Prepare for Tax Changes”. The Balance. Web. 1 Jan. 2017. https://www.thebalance.com/trump-s-tax-plan-how-it-affects-you-4113968

Tepper, Mark. “The consumer has never been stronger, and this could just be the beginning”.CNBC.Web1 Jan. 2017. https://www.cnbc.com/2017/12/21/the-consumer-has-never-been-stronger-and-this-could-just-be-the-beginning.html

Charging into LA

Michael Miosi
Mrs. Straub
AP Econ
1/3/18

Charging into LA

Going into the 2016 season the Chargers future was an uncertain one. Qualcomm Stadium, the teams home at the time, was one of the oldest and most outdated stadiums in the league and its location 15 minutes outside the city of San Diego was less than ideal. For these reasons, the team was in a standoff with the local government to try and build a downtown stadium to host the team for the future. Though many proposals made it to a vote, they failed to convince the citizens of San Diego that it was worth. The largest factor leading to the failed vote was, of course, the tax increase that would have befallen local citizens. See, when new stadiums are being built the team will contribute large sums of money but a large portion of it falls to the consumers almost as if the stadium itself is a tax and through Tax Incidence, the supplier (the team) picks up a portion and the consumers (local citizens) do as well. These many failed attempts at trying to strike a deal with San Diego eventually began to cause the Chargers organization to feel as though the city did not value or appreciate their presence. The proposal that fell through in mid-2016 was the straw that broke the camel's back. In January 2017 team owner Dean Spanos announced that the team had exhausted their time in San Diego and were to move to Los Angeles the following season where they would piggyback on the Rams new stadium deal and share the Carson city stadium set to be completed in 2019. While LA is a huge market with tons of potential, the move has raised many questions as to if it was the right decision. The divorce with San Diego was a bitter one which turned off a large portion of the team's pre-move fan base. Further, while in San Diego, the team controlled a Natural Monopoly over professional football the team will have to split that market with the Los Angeles Rams for as long as the teams remain in the city resulting in an Oligopoly. This will lead to whatever team is superior at the time to gain a majority control over the LA football market. Throughout the 2017 season, this proved to be very true. The Rams, who had a breakout year and are one of the hottest teams in the NFL boasted a fairly run of the mill total attendance at home games of 507,136 total attendees. The Chargers, on the other hand, had an average season which caused attendance to be way down, the lowest in the league, in fact, coming in at a total home attendance of 202,687 total attendees, this number is over 220,000 less than the next lowest attended home team the Cincinnati Bengals. While of course, this being the teams first season in LA and they’re in a temporary stadium are strongly contributing to this extremely low number the concern simply cannot be ignored despite the massive potential of the LA market. Reasons stated in this post as well as many others lead all of us to question. Was the charge into LA really the right direction for the franchise?

Works Cited

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2017/attendance.htm