Apologies to Ben Franklin---No, sir, we cannot keep our Republic but thanks for trying. See chart here of voters not likely to vote if the weather is bad...

Let me express the sentiment of the worst Americans in the country:

"Nahhh, I am not going to vote. I can't decide who I want to vote for ("who's running again?) plus I hear it is going to rain.  Think I will just stay home, lay on the couch, eat some Cheetos and watch Jerry Springer re-runs. Yeah, that's what I gonna do." Go 'Merica...

Apologies to Ben Frankin---no, sir, we cannot keep our Republic but thanks for trying....

Source: The Weather Channel

The increase in usage of Smartphones by parents is causing more children to go to emergency rooms for injuries. This is not a good trend and a nice expample of an unintended consequence that has a real cost to society

An interesting study in whether "correlation is causation". 

The Perils of Texting While Parenting

This article in the WSJ suggests that there has been a significant increase in the number of children requiring hospital visits for "non-fatal" injuries since 2007, due to the increase usage of Smartphones. 

This comes after a decade of DECLINE in the number of non-fatal injuries.

"Nonfatal injuries to children under age five rose 12% between 2007 and 2010, after falling for much of the prior decade, according to the most recent data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, based on emergency-room records.  

The number of Americans 13 and older who own a smartphone such as an iPhone or BlackBerry has grown from almost 9 million in mid-2007, when Apple introduced its device, to 63 million at the end of 2010 and 114 million in July 2012, according to research firm comScore. "
 

The article stops short of making a direct correlation.

"Childhood-injury specialists say there appear to be no formal studies or statistics to establish a connection between so-called device distraction and childhood injury. "What you have is an association," says Dr. Gary Smith, founder and director of the Center for Injury Research and Policy of the Research Institute at Nationwide Children's Hospital. "Being able to prove causality is the issue.... It certainly is a question that begs to be asked." 

 However, data from the CDC might shed some light in the relationship.

""Statistics from the government's Consumer Product Safety Commission, which tracks injuries by product type, show children are getting hurt more during activities and at ages that would seem to warrant close supervision. Injuries involving playground equipment among children under five jumped 17% between 2007 and 2010, after trending down the previous five years, the commission said. Injuries involving nursery equipment such as changing tables were up 31% among children under five over that period, after declining over five years. Injuries involving swimming pools climbed 36% in that age group after a slight increase over the prior five years.""

Next time you are at a playground or in a Chuck E. Cheese, look around at the parents. 
 
What are they doing??  Makes you think...
 
Here are the graphs that accompanied the article:

 

THE source of Middle Class income stagnation in the US in one easy graphic...

Ok, maybe not the source, but this HAS to be strongly considered.

Employer contributions to a workers heathcare plan are considered a "non-wage" form of compensation. The employee does not pay it, the employer does.

As you can see from this graphic, not only has the employee portion of their healthcare premiums increased significantly since 2000 (which they pay out of there earned income/wages), but the employer contributions on behalf of the employee (which the employee NEVER sees) has also increased dramatically. 



Source: Wall Street Journal

More of the firms money that goes into non-wage benefit compensation is not available to give raises or to hire more people.

Each employee becomes more expensive in wage + non-wage compensation.  Firms hire fewer workers "at the margin" and/or there is less money available for employee compensation.

A source (not necessarily THE source) of income and employment stagnation in the last 12 years for the Middle Class?

Seems somewhat reasonable to me. What do you think? 

The Opportunity Costs of Cell Phones---entertainment, movie, restaurant spending down. TANSTAAFL..Sigh...

Excellent example of Opportunity Costs---if you spend money on one thing you cannot spend it on something else.  Pretty elementary, but important to understand when you look at the "unseen" effects of those decisions on the industries that are potentially hurt:

Cell Phones Are Eating the Family Budget

"Government data show people have spent more on phone bills over the past four years, even as they have dialed back on dining out, clothes and entertainment—cutbacks that have been keenly felt in the restaurant, apparel and film industries."

"Melinda Tuers, an accounting clerk at a high school in Redlands, Calif., said she already pays close to $300 a month for her family's four smartphones. She and her husband have cut back on dining out, special events and concerts to make room for the bigger phone bill."

"But some question where the money for that data will come from. Americans spent $116 more a year on telephone services in 2011 than they did in 2007, according to the Labor Department, even as total household expenditures increased by just $67.

Meanwhile, spending on food away from home fell by $48, apparel spending declined by $141, and entertainment spending dropped by $126. The figures aren't adjusted for inflation."

Here is a nice graphic to illustrate the trade-offs, resulting in Opportunity Costs, people are making over time:

Source: Wall Street Journal

Nice graphic showing US exports of grains compared to other geographic areas. Our "BreadBasket" produces, well, lots of bread...

Productivity in the US agricultural sector is amazing.

This graphic shows how much, in millions of tons, the US Exports in various grains (corn, rice, barley, wheat, oats, etc) compared to the the next 4 largest competitors.

Keep in mind this is not total production, but just that part of domestic production that is sold to foreigners.   In the case of the US, we use about 2/3 of our land to produce grains for domestic consumption and 1/3 of the land is used for the export of grains.



Source: Big Picture Agriculture.

Our exports alone equal (approx) the exports of the European Union, Canada, Ukraine and Australia COMBINED. 

US farmers are pretty good at combining the economic resources of Land, Labor, and Capital (physical capital and technology) to produce food---for our own citizens and the rest of the world as well.

Nice graphic showing the component costs of the new i-Phone 5. How cheap it is to make is a testament to the global supply chain...

A breakdown of the cost of the component parts of the new i-Phone. 

The first graphic compares the new version with the previous version. 

The second one is the cost of the components according to the number of Gigabytes.

Remember, these are just component parts, not other costs such and R&D, marketing, transportation, on and on...



Source: Wall Street Journal



Source: isuppli

Nice Cartoon and explanation using Solar Panels to illustrate a concept called "Conspicuous Conservation".

This cartoon illustrates a concept I heard discussed in a Freakonomics Podcast: "Conspicuous Conservation and The Prius Effect"---It means people tend to purchase/consume a good or service primarily if others see them (or are overtly aware) do so. 

A good deal of satisfaction ("Utility")  derived from consuming the good/service comes from the recognition or affirmation of others. 


Source: Explosm.net

This may not matter much in most cases. So what if you want to be known as environmentally aware? You have done a good deed and others explicitly  know about it.  No harm, no foul, right?

In the Podcast mentioned above, the researchers give an example of how this can actually be inefficient and detrimental.

In Southern California people are getting lots of solar panels installed on their homes. Good thing.

However, in many cases installers recommended, for maximum efficiency and sun exposure, the solar panels be installed on a section of the house that was not visible from the street. 

The homeowners protested and had them instead install them on the front of the house, presumably so their neighbors, and others, would see them.

Not efficient, but "Conspicuous".

I highly recommend this podcast found HERE.

Should you be ashamed the workers who assembled your shiny new I-Phone 5 are only paid $2.00 per hour? Well, no, actually you should not be ashamed but encouraged. See here why...

The news aggregator Business Insider has the following headline on its homepage today:

Thank You, Millions Of Anonymous Chinese Workers Making $2 An Hour, We Love Our iPhone 5s!

It also is accompanied by the following picture:

Many of these workers (and/or their parents) moved from the country-side to take these jobs.  Their alternative would be to work jobs like these in the picture below for less (much less) than $2.00 per hour.

Opportunity Cost illustrated...Which worker is the most "exploited" by the economy?

Note: If you think this is a gross exaggeration, you must to read up on recent Chinese economic history.  You need to shed your "rich country" perspective and consider the economic ladder has rungs, not an elevator. 

Education is good during Good Times and even better during Bad Times....

Compiled By: OnlineColleges.net

Interesting short video---Social Change through Social Media

AP Macroeconomics for "Non-Traditional" High School students

I am offering an opportunity for high school aged students to take an Advanced Placement level Macroeconomics class online. 

My target audiences are home schooled students and students in public or private schools that may not offer AP Economics as a class.

Please go Economics for Homeschoolers for more specific information.

The class will be held live online at www.wiziq.com using video and whiteboard technology. There will be lectures, homework and tests.

I will issue a notarized certificate of completion at the end of the class for your own documentation purposes.

One chart you need to see as to why Medicare is more of a problem than Social Security. This is a must see!

I am beating this issue to death (as opposed to a death panel doing it for me) BUT this issue is so prominent in the Presidential race, I am going to flog it some more.

This chart shows, ON AVERAGE, the taxes someone retiring in 2010 paid over their lifetime into Medicare and Social Security, and what ON AVERAGE they will receive in lifetime benefits from these two programs.

Social Security DOES show some income redistribution effects, as higher income people tend to pay more than they will receive in benefits.  It is the reverse for lower income people.

Medicare is not even close.  Tax revenues fall significantly below benefits received for both classes of income earners. 

Solution(s): Increase Medicare taxes (now 1.45% of your gross earnings) or slow medicare spending (i.e. decrease payments to doctors/hospitals) or cut medicare benefits to the "olds" or continue to do little or nothing or reduce "waste, fraud and abuse"(or as I call them, The 3 Stooges). 


Source: Coyoteblog

Here are links to the Democratic and Republican Party Platforms (Dems JUST released today)

Here is the link to the Democratic Party Platform

Here is the link to the Republican Party Platform

Here is a link to the American Presidency Project that maintains archives on LOTS of official documents.

Here is a link specifically to PAST Party platforms at The American Presidency Project.   Interesting to see similarities and vast differences over time as to the emphasis on specific issues.

Thanks to former CHS student Rafael Lima for the link!

Enjoy. :)

Two worthy perspectives (Pro and Con) on Entitlement Spending in the US. Worth a read if you want to be informed. Otherwise, carry on as you have been...

The Wall Street Journal has two perspectives on "Entitlements" in the US Federal Budget. Read BOTH with an open mind as to the point of view.

The question posed is: "Are Entitlements Corrupting us?"

…..-Yes, American Character Is at Stake
…..-No, They’re Part of the Civic Compact

Here is what the Pres ACTUALLY said in reference to the "You did not build that" quote. See how I re-phrase it and ask why ANOTHER sentence in what he said is not talked about at all..

Below are some of the before and after sentences from the now famous off-teleprompter comments from President Obama that resulted in the "You did not build that" mantra.

If you were successful, somebody along the line gave you some help. There was a great teacher somewhere in your life. Somebody helped to create this unbelievable American system that we have that allowed you to thrive. Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business — you didn't build that. Somebody else made that happen. The Internet didn't get invented on its own. Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet. The point is, is that when we succeed, we succeed because of our individual initiative, but also because we do things together.

The fuss is what he actually meant.  I don't really know, to tell the truth.  If you take the highlighted sentence as a stand alone sentence and then it is confusing--and you have to put that at the feet of the President.  Awkward phrasing at the minimum.

Supporters of the President suggest that he was referring back to the previous sentence--"Somebody invested in roads and bridges" and the "you did not build that" refers to the fact that businesses did not actually physically build the roads and bridges.

Did he mean to say (my revisions and emphasis):  "Somebody invested in roads and bridges. If you've got a business---you did not build THOSE roads and bridges.  Somebody else made those roads and bridges happen".

This is STILL very inelegant to me! I don't really know what "somebody" refers to exactly---Government transportation workers? Wall Street Bond dealers who sell municipal construction bonds for construction projects?  Private contractors who actually invest in the equipment to build roads and bridges? Voters who approve bond elections and PAY TAXES to fund the roads?

I think ANOTHER line in the Presidents statement is curious and not sure why it has not attracted more attention:

"Government research created the Internet so that all the companies could make money off the Internet."

Does it help to have the line preceding it for reference?  Did the government researchers 50 years ago develop the internet with the expressed goal of creating a market for it in which companies will get fabulously rich? Emphatic no! Yes, you could say "You KNOW what he meant!!". True, but that is not what he said.  This sentence is just as awkward as the other.  I get hung up on the "so that" connector.  If I was grading this as a test, I would put a question mark over/on it.

The only line with positive effect, in my opinion, is the last sentence.  I can buy that---to an extent.