Something's fishy in Alaska in the canned salmon market. Let's go to the graphs.

Another day, another easy pickin' economics lesson pulled from the headlines.

"Alaska Governor asks the Federal Government to buy Surplus Canned Salmon"

Gov. Sean Parnell has asked a federal agency to buy about 1 million cases of canned pink salmon to ease a glut that has weighed down prices for Alaska fishermen this year. 

Parnell made the request in a letter to U.S. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack this week. He wants the USDA to purchase $37 million worth of canned pink salmon under a federal law that allows for buying surplus food from farmers and donating it to food banks or other programs. 

USDA purchased $20 million worth of salmon earlier this year, which Parnell called an important first step in reducing inventories to help slow a price decline that he said threatened the 2014 fishing season. 

He said remaining unsold inventories are driving prices to levels that threaten harvest activity this year and next, with the price of canned pink salmon 23 percent lower than a year ago and the advance price paid to fishermen down about 33 percent.

By purchasing the surplus canned salmon from Alaskan fish processors, the Governor is essentially asking for a de facto PRICE FLOOR be imposed on the market for Canned Salmon.

The thinking is this: Buy the surplus so the processors (1) don't have to unload it at lower prices (this is not mentioned in the article) and (2) the price the processors pay fisherman for their catch for the upcoming season will not decrease.  Easy, right?

Let's go to the graphs to see how this plays out.  Hope it helps you in understanding your lesson on this topic.

Soft drinks and Federal Food Assistance ("Food Stamps"). See here why Coca Cola is so interested in this relationship...

Just doing some reading and came across an article on Coca-Cola's lobbying effort to make sure soft drinks are not excluded from purchase under the SNAP program (formerly known as "food stamps).  SNAP stands for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. 

I wondered why they would be so interested.

The lobbying group Science in the Public Interest estimates that $4 Billion of the $80 Billion allocated to the SNAP program (that's 5%)  is spent on carbonated soft drinks by recipients. This total does NOT include non-carbonated drinks like Monsters, Gatorade, etc, so the total on high sugar content drinks is likely significantly higher.

I was curious about how much this $4 Billion in transfer payments was as a percent of total soft drink sales.

In 2012 total soft drink sales were about $60 Billion, however that includes all outlets where soft drinks can be purchased such as restaurants, vending machines, sporting venues, grocery and convenience stores.

SNAP benefits cannot be used at all these locations. They can only be used at grocery and convenience stores primarily.  According to a WSJ article total sales in grocery stores and convenience stores are about $28.7 Billion of the $60 Billion.

$4 Billion as a percent of $28.7 Billion is 14% of total soft drink sales that are derived from the SNAP program.

NOW I know why they are so interested---that is substantial for the industry...and Coke.

Let the special interest money flow...

Was Romney right in saying we need fewer Fire Fighters? See the graphs/data here before yelling at me...

Here are a couple of graphs showing some interesting information regarding firemen (and women).

The first one shows the decrease in the number of fires since 1980 (the RED line and look at the left hand scale) of about 40% and the increase in the number of firefighters (BLUE line and look at the right hand scale) of about 40%.  We have many more firemen fighting fewer fires.

Source: Marginal Revolution

The second graph is pretty self-explanatory.  The left scale shows the number of calls to the fire department  for medical calls (BLUE line), actual fire calls (Solid RED line) and false alarms (dotted RED line). 

Source: Marginal Revolution

In most cities we have firehouses that support BOTH ambulance service and firefighting equipment/trucks.  The trend in the graphs seem to show we need fewer, expensive full service firehouses and more ambulance based houses with less capital requirements (trucks, etc) that would be less expensive. 

Having said this, I LOVE MY FIRE DEPARTMENT!! :)

Nice article on "Rent-Seeking"---"The Rest of the Story" behind why Banks are now charging YOU fees for using your Debit Card...

I linked the article/opinion piece below in my previous post with the Venn diagram showing the over-arching common bond that the TEA party and the Wall Street protest movement have in common.  I am linking it again because it reveals "the rest of the story" behind the recent imposition of bank fees on debit card use.  I was not aware of this backstory, but probably should have known there was more to it. 

It illustrates the relationship between corporations and the interest groups they fund to get politicians to enact legislation favorable to them.  It also highlights the dirty business of former aides to longtime politicians who quit and become highly paid lobbyists.  This gives them an inside track to influence their former bosses in Congress/The Senate.   

Read it and I am guessing your reaction will be something to the effect: "Oh, C'mon! That is just NOT right!!"...

Thank Wal-Mart for your new bank card fee

When Bank of America announced last week that it would charge $5 a month to customers who make purchases with their debit card, customers railed against the bank.

Many conservatives and libertarians said the anger should be aimed at Congress and the Obama administration, which, through last year's Dodd-Frank financial regulation bill, effectively outlawed the old debit card business model, spurring Bank of America to make this change.

But the real culprit is Walmart and the retail lobby, which used government to squeeze banks and fatten their own bottom line. Walmart won, banks lost, and now customers are stuck with a new monthly fee.