Black Friday

Alec Wandler

Mrs. Straub

Economics B3

17 November 2014

Black Friday

With Thanksgiving coming up and Black Friday being just around the corner, stores like Walmart, Best Buy, and other big corporations are going to be swimming in cash due to the increased demand in products. For those of you who don’t understand, Black Friday is the day after Thanksgiving, where prices on goods and services are given special offers to help with seasonal purchases. When these prices go down, the demand for certain goods goes up. Not only will the demand of these goods go up, but the supply will raise as well due to the increased demand of goods, and the equilibrium will drastically decrease from the special offers. But how could a company possibly drop their prices from up to 90% off? The reason being is because of markup, and that the products don’t actually cost quite as much as they seem they might. Even though these stores might knock down the price 90%, they’re still making a profit. In the past, Black Friday has always been known to start the day after Thanksgiving, but according to Ashley Rodriguez from the AdvertisingAge article, she claims that, “In the past few years, stores began opening on Thanksgiving Day (some have taken to calling it Gray Thursday). This year,Walmart is stretching "Black Friday" over five days during November and December, and Target has already begun previewing its holiday promotions. Macy's, Kohl's, Best Buy and J.C. Penney are also opening earlier on Thanksgiving Day than in previous years” (Rodriguez). Stores are beginning to open nearly a week before Black Friday to give them more of an advantage in producing more sales. These companies are bound to see a big increase in their annual income, and will bring in a lot more revenue. According to Bill Martin, founder of ShopperTrak, sales are expected to rise 3.8%. Last year, many companies showed many different results on how well they actually did in sales.

This graph is used to display the 2013 companies that did the best on Black Friday (in millions).

Not only will shoppers be benefiting from these seasonal sales that Black Friday has to offer, but seasonal jobs will be in demand, and employees will benefit from temporary wage increases. Employees at select Walmarts that make minimum wage ($7.25) could make $15 an hour. Thats a little over twice what they make on a day to day basis. The demand for working will certainly go up because of the overtime/holiday pay rate. Black Friday plays a huge role every year on our countries economy. Nearly everyone is affected by this day. Businesses will invest in advertising in catalogs, newspapers, and via websites. The companies that own these advertising businesses will start to see an increase in their profits. The health of the economy will start to go up because of the demand for goods and services, and the amount of sales made. Customers will benefit by getting better deals on necessities and on the luxuries they may want. Overall, everyone will be happier. All in all, Black Friday has a major positive impact on the economy, and I’m sure the majority of you reading this will be participating and taking advantage of these special offers.

Bibliography

"Early Holiday Promotions Eat Away Black Friday Sales | CMO Strategy - Advertising Age." Advertising Age CMO Strategy RSS. Web. 17 Nov. 2014. <http://adage.com/article/cmo-strategy/early-holiday-promotions-eat-black-friday-sales/295884/>.

"Walmart Workers Promise Biggest Black Friday Strike Ever." ThinkProgress Walmart Workers Promise Biggest Black Friday Strike Ever Comments. Web. 17 Nov. 2014. <http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/11/14/3592556/walmart-black-friday-2014/>.

"Black Friday by the Numbers!" Make Me Social Blog. Web. 17 Nov. 2014. <http://makemesocialblog.wordpress.com/2011/11/28/black-friday-by-the-numbers/>.

New Bucks Arena a Necessity

New Bucks Arena A Necessity

The Milwaukee Bucks are at a crossroads of sorts and they will need to choose which path they want to take by the year 2017. The fork in the road right now is whether to build a new stadium, or leave Milwaukee. The BMO Harris Bradley Center is the oldest stadium in the NBA. Due to its age, it is falling behind on league expectations and regulations. The Milwaukee Bucks’ contract with the BMO Harris Bradley Center is up in 2017. This contract has made up a natural deadline for new owners Wesley Edens and Marc Lasry. This deadline has been issued by the NBA and it states that if the Bucks don’t have plans for a new arena by 2017 that they will be forced to sell the team back to the NBA. The NBA would then take them to another city that has a proper stadium to house them. The city of Seattle is  often brought up during these talks. The Milwaukee owners and former owner Herb Kohl have both vowed to donate money toward this effort but now they need our help. The ball is in our hands Wisconsin, and the shot clock is on, its time to make a decision.

The Bucks were sold from former senator of 25 years and Owner of nearly 30  Herb Kohl, with one stipulation, that they had to be kept in Milwaukee. Herb Kohl also pledged to donate one hundred million dollars towards a new arena. The new owners Marc Lasry and Wesley Edens also pledged to put in a minimum of a hundred million dollars to match Herb. With a new 21st century entertainment center estimated to cost 4-5 hundred million dollars, these two donations would be putting the Bucks about halfway to getting a new Stadium. This has certain people such as Robert Edelman of the Journal Sentinel are ignorant to the Benefits of a new Arena and the consequences of not building one. They create hypothetical negative externalities, while ignoring the glaring positive externalities. Building a new stadium will keep the team in Milwaukee which will help towards Wisconsin’s GDP and create jobs for building the stadium temporarily lowering the unemployment rate.

Also it will be able to host the Marquette Men’s Basketball Team and the Milwaukee Admirals. Not to mention various other events that come to Milwaukee such as  Monster Truck Rallies, The WWE, Concerts, and the Harlem Globetrotters.The new arena will in addition be more handicap accessible as the BMO Harris Bradley Center is not up to code in the way of handicap accessibility. The new stadium will excite the community when thinking of the Milwaukee Bucks and their young talented team of Brandon Knight, Giannis “Greek Freak” Antetokounmpo, the 2nd pick in the 2014 draft; Jabari Parker. A new arena like the one drawn out by the Milwaukee Bucks is an attraction that will bring the community closer and has a much larger marginal benefit than cost.. The upside of the new stadium is ignored from Robert Edelman’s article. His article regarding a new stadium points out problems that don’t exist. He is more worried of the de minimis amount of money coming out of taxpayers’ pockets.

A common belief is that a pro sports team can be a key driver of economic growth, but he is skeptical of this because when Los Angeles lost the NFL’s Rams to Saint Louis they didn’t experience a deterrence in economic growth. This is because Los Angeles has eight other Professional teams with two MLS teams, two NBA teams, two NHL teams, and two MLB teams. We are not Los Angeles. We have two Professional teams. Losing the Bucks would be losing 50% of our professional sports team and in the process a part of Wisconsin culture. If the Bucks were forced to leave the Admirals would soon follow suit. after they left, Marquette would then need to build a new stadium and would most likely come back to the government to campaign for public spending to help build a new facility; talk about throwing salt in the wound. Right after we deny the bucks a new arena we go out and help Marquette out a little while after.

   One of Robert Edelmans arguing points was poor attendance. About fifteen to twenty years ago the Brewers were in the same boat as the Bucks are today, and at the time the Brewers were performing similarly to the Bucks last year. They were towards the bottom of the league. We solved this with a new stadium. After completion of the stadium, attendance doubled in the first year at Miller Park despite having an even worse record. Historically our beloved Brewers are Wisconsin’s worst professional sports team yet somehow they managed to talk the city into helping them out with a new stadium. Today another Milwaukee sports team is crying out for our help to stay here. They want to stay here so they can perform for our great fanbase of Milwaukee and were going to give them the cold shoulder? Now that’s just wrong. How many times do you hear a group of people say that they want to be in Milwaukee over someplace else. Not often. We are willing to let them go to Seattle because we aren’t willing to drop a dime on something that will help Milwaukee and Wisconsin grow economically? Many restaurant and sports bar owners state that the 41 nights that the Milwaukee Bucks are in town are their 41 busiest nights of the year.

Letting the Bucks leave is a mistake and that is why I urge you to help the Milwaukee Bucks in their time of need. It would be an example of the invisible hand. Us helping them would ultimately help ourselves as well. Also help them so we don’t turn out like Seattle. They had an up and coming young Sonics team just like the Bucks do now, and had to watch them succeed in Oklahoma City with envy. We want… no we need to keep the Bucks so we can celebrate their future success in Milwaukee.

Works Cited

Edelman, Robert. "Resist Bucks' Blackmail." Another View. JS Online, 11 Nov. 2014. Web. 11             Nov. 2014. <http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/we-should-resist-blackmail-by-milwaukee-bucks-b99229715z1-251344871.html>.  

To Heat, Not to Heat?

Christian Memmo

Economics 4B

Mr. Jim Reuter

12 October 2014

To Heart, or Not to Heat?

Consider this: the average American Joe drives eighty-seven minutes a day (Langer), and that’s just the average. The above-average Joe drives his daughter to school, forgets his briefcase at home, drives home, then makes a thirty minute commute to work. Then, he drives with some buddies from work out to lunch ten minutes away, then back to work, then back to pick his daughter up from school, then back to his home. This probably seems like a recurring routine to many Americans in the higher middle class; more income equals more expenditure. More expenditure equals a need for gas. A need for gas equals the emission of CO2. Now, for the sake of postulates, the average American car emits 9,737.44 pounds of CO2 into the atmosphere each year.

Believe it or not, this is shockingly true. Twenty-five million cars currently drive in the US annually. Calculating the total number of pounds that equates to in CO2 emissions, we get...243,436,000,000 (two hundred, forty-three billion, four hundred, thirty-six million) pounds of CO2 every year. That’s 121,718,000 tons of CO2 being released into the atmosphere. To put this in perspective, the Empire State Building weighs 365,000 tons. That means that each year, American alone emits three hundred and thirty-three point four seven (333.47) Empire State Buildings into the atmosphere. This isn’t even counting the other 975,000,000 cars that exist in the world, and their average fuel emission per year.

This is not okay.

Take a look at this lower-than-ideal quality video from Neil DeGrasse Tyson’s Cosmos, visualizing the frequency at which we emit this unseen danger:

<Please embed this link into my blog post instead of leaving it as this text, if possible>

It certainly looks uglier than we see it, doesn’t it? It gets even worse. Here’s a graph of the temperature anomalies in Earth’s oceans since 1880. The Model-T was invented in 1908, around the time the annual temperature anomaly began to increase some, then more and more. Around World War Two, when America’s vehicular production industry skyrocketed, so did the oceans’ temperature. Now, we’re at an all time high, with about a 1.0 anomaly increase since cars were first invented. Perhaps this graph would have gone a different way if cars were never a thing?

(Graph and data courtesy of GISS at NASA)

Another interesting tidbit: since 1998, the planet’s climate has accumulated 2,145,100,050 Hiroshima Atomic Bombs’ worth of heat...and that number is steadily increasing by 4 more atomic bombs per second(GPWayne). Okay, so there’s quite a bit of data and fluff here, but what does it have to do with anything economic? Surely exhaust doesn’t change the day-to-day operations of our economy?

(Graph courtesy of Juliana Rotich)

Wrong! The unstoppable force can indeed move the immovable object. The Earth’s climate can and does have a pretty large effect on the costs our governments put into managing human life from even the mildest to the extremest of climates found all over earth. If CO2 emissions continue to increase by the day, soon enough, many regions of Earth will become uninhabitable; too dry for fertile land, terrible for clean water, and plain uncomfortable. The only logical solution would be to decrease the country’s (and hopefully the world’s) annual CO2 emissions, and to do so, the government would have to subsidize a heck of a lot of organizations to attain the resources needed to move mass populations and simultaneously manage them. There is an apparent correlation between countries’ GDPs and CO2 emissions: both rise at a proportional rate. So proportional, in fact, an accurate equation has been written (CO2=0.3819(GDP)+10.604) to predict future GDPs relative to average CO2 emissions (Breakthrough). So, countries will have to inevitably prioritize and understand their opportunity costs of both decisions, and decide: “Do we want a lower GDP or lower CO2 emissions?”

Think about this: the marginal benefit for buying another gallon of fuel for your car gets you further, quicker, but in doing so, you emit more CO2 into the air, giving you your marginal cost. One is blatantly worse for the purity of the air. We are presented with a situation where the private goods of car ownership actually harm public goods, being public space (one would think such an elastic or unnecessary product wouldn’t be so popular...)

Leaving such disgusting toxins in the air, gasoline conglomerates - like BP - face moral crossroads on aspects other than simply Supply & Demand. Albeit there is a definite scarcity in oil left on the planet, these companies have to consider raising the price to discourage the average consumer from buying another gallon. Yes, not even transportation is in the situation to consider itself Laissez Faire, there must be some regulation.

And yet...there isn’t...at least not one that makes a considerable difference.

Consider these facts the next time you’re driving to school, or to a friend’s, or to a job, or a concert, a meeting, a football game, an errand. Americans drive a lot more than we once thought, and we’ll inevitably pay for it in a fashion that won’t please or benefit our species in the very near future.

Works Cited

"Average Annual Emissions and Fuel Consumption for Gasoline-Fueled Passenger Cars and Light Trucks."Environmental Protection Agency. Web. 8 Oct. 2014.

<http://www.epa.gov/otaq/consumer/420f08024.pdf>.

"Climate Science Glossary." Skeptical Science. Web. 8 Oct. 2014.

<http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-limits-economy-basic.htm>.

"Carbon Dioxide and the Global Economy."The Breakthrough Institute -. Web. 7 Oct. 2014.

<http://thebreakthrough.org/archive/carbon_dioxide_and_the_global>.

"Using Web2.0 Tools for Environmental Activism · Global Voices." Global Voices Overall RSS 20. Web. 7 Nov. 2014.

<http://globalvoicesonline.org/2008/01/28/using-web20-tools-for-environmental-activism/>.

"National Aeronautics and Space Administration." Data.GISS: GISS Surface Temperature Analysis: Analysis Graphs and Plots. Web. 11 Oct. 2014.

<http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/graphs_v3/>.

Can the Milwaukee Bucks stay in Milwaukee?

Conner O’Malley

Mr. Rueter

Economics

11 Nov 2014

Can the Milwaukee Bucks stay in Milwaukee?

The Milwaukee Bucks have been a team that has its ups and downs. In the past 10 years, the Bucks have only been able to make it to the playoffs 3 times, and they lost in the 1st round for all 3. Fans don’t find it enjoyable anymore to come and watch their home team get pounded over and over. It’s actually embarrassing saying that you’re a Bucks fan. Could the next few years finally be the key to turning this franchise around?

Financial issues for the team and in the city of Milwaukee shocked everyone when the city threatened to release the Bucks and accept another city to buy the Bucks (which would most likely be Seattle). Seattle left because of the same reason Milwaukee is faced with. The lack of demand for a new stadium caused the team to move to Oklahoma City. The BMO Harris Bradley Center was built in 1988 making it 27 years old. The Bucks are ready to build a new stadium, but they need the cities help. Estimated costs for a new arena would be between $400 to $500 million. The Bucks can build a new arena at anytime, but they don’t have the financial stability to do it. If private investors don’t cover the rest of the expenses, then taxpayers will have to pay for the rest which would be a little of $100 million dollars. Marc Lasry already made plans to start building a new arena in the year of 2015, but if private investors or  taxpayers don’t pay up, the NBA will buy the Bucks in 2017 and take them somewhere else.

In the 2014 NBA Draft, the Milwaukee selected the best player in the draft Jabari Parker. This was a huge success for Milwaukee because Parker is a very well known player that was born and raised in Chicago and played his college career at Duke University. He’s also sponsored by Jordan, a very famous basketball brand. Other noticeable players that bring more and more fans to the games are Larry Sanders who is known for his big body and somewhat anger issues, Giannis Antetokounmpo or “Greek Freak” is what some call the next Kevin Durant and the next superstar in the near future. With the new faces that are showing up in Milwaukee, the crowd attendance at the BMO Harris Bradley Center will continues increase from previous years. Plus, the amount of gear bought for the players will help the Bucks financial as well. Instead of forcing friends to come to games before, now they know that they won’t waste any opportunity cost because they’ll be a exciting game that they can watch.

Last season for the Bucks was horrible, but it was a rebuilding season hoping to get a good pick in the draft which they did. The main theme for the Bucks is “Own the Future” which is a very accurate and appropriate words to use because of the youth of the Bucks. The Bucks only have three more years till the NBA buys the team, but with the talent that we have right now, I believe that the money will be made and the fan attends will increase dramatically. The Bucks will make it to the playoffs this year and the city of Milwaukee will yet again believe in there team. Go Bucks Go!

Possible spot for new Bucks arena

Works Cited

Ramde, Dinesh. "Alderman: New Arena Might Need Regional Sales Tax." FOX 11 Online WLUKTV. N.p., 17 Apr. 2014. Web. 10 Nov. 2014.

Watson, Phil. "Report: Milwaukee Bucks Closing In On Land Deal For New Arena."Dairyland Express Report Milwaukee Bucks Closing In On Land Deal For New Arena Comments. Fansided, 8 Nov. 2014. Web. 10 Nov. 2014.

Powell, Michael. "An Arena Fairy Tale With Blurred Morals." The New York Times. The New York Times, 16 Oct. 2014. Web. 10 Nov. 2014.

Kacner, Krystle. "New Investors Could Mean a New Arena for Milwaukee Bucks."FOX6Nowcom. Fox 6, 17 Oct. 2014. Web. 11 Nov. 2014.

Should NCAA players be paid to play?

Andrew Koenig

Mrs. Straub

AP Economics

November 10, 2014

Should NCAA players be paid to play?

Over the years there has been controversy on whether or not a collegiate athlete should be compensated for the work that they put in on the field. The fact of the matter is that the NCAA has an almost pure monopoly when a high school player wants to play in the NFL, the NBA, or any other professional sport. The nearest substitute would be to play overseas, which a mere three athletes have chosen to do since 2006. This allows the NCAA to have a total revenue of nearly twelve billion dollars a year, with a growth rate that outpaces companies like McDonald’s and Chevron. According to college board the average cost to go to a private college is $22,826 per year. When taken into account that there are 450,000 student athletes in the NCAA the average total cost for the industry is 10 billion dollars. Since the NCAA is technically a non profit organization, it has no shareholders and doesn’t pay taxes, so that means that there is two billion dollars that is used on things other than the students. March Madness is wildly popular, and as shown in the graph below the advertising for March Madness trumps even the largest sport in the United States, the NFL. But March Madness brings in a staggering total revenue of 1.15 billion dollars, covering the ad costs and so much more.

A common counter argument to whether or not student athletes should get paid is just that, they are students first, athletes second. But is this really the case? A few years ago players at UNC were found to be enrolled in “paper classes” which essentially were classes that in most high schools wouldn’t qualify as anything. Students were not required to attend these classes were only required to write a small paper which would end up being the entire semester grade. These papers were always given either an A or a B, no matter what type of content was on there. In reality the students are worth more to their schools when they have a hundred yard gain or an interception on saturday rather than doing well in their classes and getting something from their education. One of the final arguments that people have is that students are getting to go there for free. But then there are stories like that of Arian Foster who went to his coach and said “Coach we don’t have no food man, and we don’t have any money. And i’m hungry, either give us some food or I’m gonna go out and do something stupid.” The coach proceeded to go out and buy Arian and four of his teammates fifty tacos to split between them, which was an NCAA violation. There are countless other stories like that, all while most of these coaches are getting paid millions of dollars. In most states the highest paid public employee is a college football coach, with Nick Saban leading the pack bringing in a salary of 5.6 million dollars every year.

When it comes down to it athletes need to get paid to play in their sport. Even if it’s just enough to live comfortably. When an athlete needs to go to their coach for food and then for it to be illegal for that coach to help him out, then something is severely wrong with the system and it needs to be changed.

Works Cited

"Kantar Media." Kantar Media. Kantar Media, 10 Mar. 2014. Web. 10 Nov. 2014.

Schooled: The Price of College Sports. Dir. Susan Saladoff, Ross Finkel, Trevor Martin, and Jonathan Paley. Perf. Kevin Anderson, Jay Bilas, and Taylor Branch. ESPN 30 for 30, 2013. ESPN, 16 Oct. 2013. Web. 10 Nov. 2014.

Richter, Felix. "Infographic: March Madness Trumps Pro Sports Leagues in TV Ad Spend." Statista Infographics. N.p., 17 Mar. 2014. Web. 11 Nov. 2014.

"What's the Price Tag for a College Education?" COLLEGEdata. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Nov. 2014.

Labor Force Participation Rate

Written by: Alex Rogowski

Labor Force Participation Rate

Politicians, media, and economists all use the unemployment rate to gauge the health of the US economy.  The unemployment rate is the percentage of the total labor force that is unemployed yet currently seeking a job. The government began officially tracking the unemployment rate in 1950, yet they have been able to estimate unemployment rates prior to this time. The highest unemployment rate occurred during the 1930’s, when the rate skyrocketed to 23.6% and its lowest rate came during World War II when the unemployment rate fell to 1.2 percent in 1944.     

During the recession that began in 2008, the unemployment rate spiked to 10% in October of 2009, and it has dramatically fallen to its current level of 5.8%.  These numbers would generally indicate that the economy is trending in the right direction, but that may not be the case. In light of the sharp decline in unemployment; why aren't people viewing the economy optimistically? The answer may be hidden in the Labor Force Participation Rate (LFPR) which has seen a steady decline since the recession.  

The Labor Force Participation rate measures the active members within the labor force. To be considered active, you must either have a job or currently seeking one. In October of 2009 our participation rate was 65.1%, even with 10% unemployment. Currently our participation rate has dipped to  62.8%, almost a 3 point drop. The correlation quite possibly could be a result of fewer people actively looking for jobs.  The consequence of people dropping out of the workforce completely, may artificially improve the overall unemployment number, masking the true state of unemployment within the economy.

Unemployment Chart

Many people are questioning how the LFPR could decrease at such a high rate. One possible component of this decline is that the Baby Boomer generation is just beginning to retire. Roughly 17 percent of Baby Boomers have retired up from 10 percent in 2010.  Some Baby Boomers that may have lost their job in our most recent recession may not have attempted to resume employment, while others have simply retired.  The Baby Boomer generation which consists of those born between 1946 and 1964, makes up for about 75 million people.("What Baby Boomers' Retirement Means For the U.S. Economy." )

A study done by Bob Funk, Chief executive of Express Employment Professionals found that 47% of unemployed people have completely given up on looking for work.("Why Are People Leaving the Workforce?") This suggests that a certain amount of workers have become discouraged and feel it’s impossible to find suitable employment.  Another contributing factor to the declining number could be the expansion of Food Stamps and Disability programs which are keeping many out of the active workforce. With recent increases in benefits the unemployed may feel its advantageous to continue receiving benefits rather than accepting a low paying job.

The unemployment rate has been the standard indicator of where the economy may be headed. Historically, this measurement has been very reliable barometer of the direction of the economy. However since the 2008 recession this may not be the case. Additional measures  such as Labor Force Participation may be helpful in gauging the true state of unemployment within the US economy. Therefore, is the unemployment rate the only true way you can figure out the direction of the economy?

Works Cited

Casselman, Ben. "What Baby Boomers' Retirement Means For the U.S. Economy." FiveThirtyEight. ESPN, 2014. Web. 10 Nov. 2014.

Krulick, Al. "United States Unemployment - History, Causes & Consequences." Debtorg News. Debt.Org, 2014. Web. 09 Nov. 2014.

"Labor Force Participation Rate Chart." Bureau of Labor Statistics Data. US Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2014. Web. 07 Nov. 2014.

Peterson, Kim. "Why Are People Leaving the Workforce?" Why Are People Leaving the Workforce? CBS Interactive, 6 Oct. 2014. Web. 09 Nov. 2014.

"Unemployment Rates." Bureau of Labor Statistics Data. US Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2014. Web. 08 Nov. 2014.