Jamie Dovolis: Epilogue

In the epilogue of naked econ was to raise a few questions, the one i found most interesting was the question, of "how rich is rich enough?" (218). How much time are we willing to invest to make our lives better? Money is said to make you life better a solution to most of your problems  but what are  their negative side effects? (more money more problems) With the extra hours worked by the people is this going to help or harm the middle class and the welth divide? If we make more do we also raise taxes to support the lower end, or are their layoffs as were become more efficient with production thuse not needing as many people to meet the demand.

Cat Potts, Epilogue, Question 2

The epilogue of Naked Economics answers the question which many people who study economics ask: "What about the humanitarian aspect of economics?" We've discussed this in class nearly everyday, whether it be regarding sweatshops or unemployment or poverty. Wheelan reminds us that economics is not an exact science (because if it were, heaven knows we wouldn't be swimming in trillions of dollars of debt and an ever increasing wealth gap), but rather a set of tools which we can use to attempt to better our lives. But, that doesn't mean that economics is irrelevant. At the very end of the epilogue, Wheelan points out that there is an economic aspect of every major issue which our society faces today. So, how do we find the balance? How do we use our knowledge of economy to better the lives of everyone, not only financially but also on a level of basic human need? We have the knowledge and capabilities to positively affect change. Can we predict exactly what the outcome will be when we try to make the world a better place? Of course not. But we have to try. Wheelan mentions that "our fiscal trajectory is unsustainable." Is it just me, or is that absolutely terrifying? One day, things are going to come crashing down. And if we are left financially broken and cannot even manage to communicate with one another properly and come together as a society, how will we ever progress?

Kyle Kispert. Epilogue. Question 6

In the epilogue, Wheelan brings up an interesting question when discussing "How many minutes of work will a loaf of bread cost?"Work is something virtually everyone in the Unites States seek to do at various stages of life. Its hard to have an income without working. As talked about in this book, the economy is growing the more we work. In that paragraph, Wheelan asks how rich is rich enough? As people get more wealthier so does the nation. This has obvious positive effects on our lives. For example, as America becomes wealthier, health care can improve and become more accessible in the long run. This chapter made me think if there are any negative impacts to our nation getting wealthier. In many utopian movies that I can think of, where there seems to be an endless supply of money, a problem always arises and people don't always appear as happy. If one day we become so rich that we can have anything we want, would we feel satisfied or would we lose morals. I think that not being the richest man in the world drives us to work harder and learn more. No one knows how much our economy will grow but human life may be dramatically different it if continues to grow.

Sam McDonald Epilogue #6

As I read the Epilogue of Naked Economics, I came to a section that was very refreshing for me. This section stated that although today American's are one of the hardest working people of most first world country's, as wages increase there will be a point where we work less hours. Naked Economics goes on  to list some things that are equally, if not more, valuable than the machine that is capitalism and economics. Some of these things are humanity values, culture, beauty, and community. After reading this entire book which focuses on only what is good for the economy I have been swept up a bit by its mechanical reasoning which disregards many human values. Reading the epilogue made be ponder whether we should rely more on economics or our human values.

Thomas Shogren, Epilogue, Question #6

The passage that struck me as interesting was about the future of the fiscal house of America. Obviously the fiscal policy in place right now isn't working and it needs change (the sooner the better). If the fiscal policy doesn't change then not only will the American economy tank, but the economy of the whole world will spiral down into economic downturn. The economy is "more like a group of mountain climbers tethered together on the edge of a precipice" (Wheelan 323). If one economy falls then all the others will fall with it. Therefore, if the fiscal policy doesn't change in America then America (and the world for that matter) could be a really different place in 2050, and not for the better.

Caroline Pellegrin, Epilogue, Question Two

As a country I think we like to live in the present.  For the most part people don't think too much about what our economy will look like 50 so years from now. We are concerned about Taylor Swift's new music video and ISIS (some of us more than others), not the state of our future economy. I think that's because we feel like we have little control over our nation's economy. After reading this book, I realize that is true, but also not true. (so not eloquent)  While we can't control what the Federal Reserve does or if the stock market takes a dip, we do have an influence. When people are involved in politics and community based organizations their economic decisions begin to hold more weight. While we can't control if our neighbor doesn't recycle, we can choose to elect a political figure who upholds "sin taxes." We live in a country that is flawed, challenged and often frustrating, but we do have a voice. We can make changes, but we need to be able to look beyond our immediate circumstances.

Andre LaRenzie, Epilogue, Question #6

The final passage of "Naked Economics" includes the author, Charles Wheelan, talking about what the future of the American Economy will look like. He touches on 7 different topics including poverty, future debt of America, and the economy possibly solving social issues. Narrowing in on the social issues, he raises the topic of teaching salary. America does not reward teachers for how well or how poorly they teach their subject. Also, because of this, teachers are highly over educated and highly under appreciated with salaries, especially when we live in a nation that is founded upon schooling. I found this passage interesting because I have agreed with this topic. Teachers should be judged on how well they teach, or how poorly. Then teachers have incentives to help build the youth of this nation. Wheel an hopes that social issues like this will be fixed in the future, and I will be hoping for the same. Mr. Hoffner's salary would be high based off of his teaching ability obviously. (Insert 10 extra credit points)

Amelia Vayda, Epilogue, Question 7

In the epilogue of Naked Economics, Wheelan discusses seven questions that he believes should be asked to help us see where the economy will be in a few years. While reading this last chapter I learned that our future economy is hard to predict because you don't know how changes that we make now will affect the future. Not knowing how the economy is going to end up is a little unnerving. There are many changes that could occur, for example how many hours people work or how many years people work. This introduction into a world of the unknown has changed my way of thinking. I always thought that how we live now will never change, but that is not exactly true. Now I see that we could have a totally different education system, work ethic, and even a different ratio between rich and poor. I get a new perspective that what we do now could either help or hurt us in the long run. 

Emma Tyler, Epilogue, Question #2

In the epilogue of Naked Economics, Wheelan writes "The remarkable thing about economics is that once you've been exposed to the big ideas, they begin to show up everywhere" (325). Coming to the close of this novel, I have found that economics is everywhere and it affects my everyday life. Additionally, in the epilogue I saw how economics can affect my future, the future of the US, and the future of the world. For example, on a personal level, if economics is used in some way to rearrange the education system, like Wheelen discussed at one point, then I will have to deal with the outcomes of that decision if I have children someday whom I put into that system. Or speaking on a national level, if the US doesn't get it together and figure out a way to pay back our enormous debt to China, and pay for the expenses that come with the aging population of Baby Boomers, we will be in a huge economic mess. And even regarding the status of the entire world, good economic choices can affect the development of currently impoverished countries and make them the new "Asian Tigers," well, rather the "African Tigers." I have learned from this book that economics affects my everyday life and my future in a huge way.

Jamie Dovolis

This chapter disscuses how trade and globalization bennifists just about everyone. Yet people argue and exclame how bad trade is, they go out of there way to protest, boycott, and debate. This shows me that people are dumb. People like to cause a huff over fulty information. The workers we are producing cheep clothing because they have no better options, making $2 an hour is infinitely better then making nothing. These protesters if they want to help should not boycott there only income, but help build up there resources, by donating and helping these communitys. So even though their pay is poor their quality of life can improve.

Andre LaRenzie, Chapter 12, Question #6

In chapter 12 of "Naked Economics" by Charles Wheelan, the author speaks on the topic of Trade and Globalization. More specifically, he highlights many points on what trade does. In the section titled "Trade Makes us Richer", Wheelan touches on the topic of productivity making us richer and specialization making us productive. He uses the example of mechanical engineers in Seattle compared to factory workers who make clothing in Bangladesh. He asks why do we import clothes made by unskilled workers when we can have others do that who are more qualified? He then answers this question by saying that the engineers are busy making airplanes, and maximizing their value for their time. Creating clothes that an unskilled worker could is a waste of time for a qualified engineer. I found this particular passage illuminating because I've always wondered why we import clothing from poor countries and unskilled workers when we can make it ourselves. I now have my answer.

Kispert Kyle. Chapter 12. Question 4

In previous chapter we have analyzed, it was concluded that on most occasions political leaders (such as govoners) will shape policies to improve the present day; which will keep people happy and improve chances of reelection. This proves effective keeping in mind that future leaders will do the same to benefit their time. In chapter 12, Wheelan talks about outsourcing and it's effects. The short turn effects can be negative and make many people angry; still no politician has made it illegal. There's two sides to the problem regarding policies and there intentions. My opinion about this is to always keep the future in mind. If a policy is made that is not reasonable but only improves today and benefits yourself by keeping people happy, I don't believe it is a wise decision. Though people may not understand the future benefits, I still think it should still be the goal to secure a better future.

Thomas Shogren, Chapter 12, Question #6

There were two passages in this chapter that struck me as very significant. The first passage was, "productivity is what makes us rich. Specialization is what makes us productive. Trade allows us to specialize" (Wheelan 275). This quote explains itself because as people become more productive they can become wealthier by producing more. People can become more productive because they specialize in what they are the best at. Trade allows people to specialize because without trade everyone would have to produce everything they need in order to survive, which would make specialization impossible. The second passage was, "in the long run, trade facilitates growth and a growing economy can absorb displaced workers" (Wheelan 275). Many people don't like globalization because it costs others jobs. However in the long run globalization creates more jobs and causes people to become more educated and productive so that they can stay employed. Globalization also lowers costs of goods and services because the cost of production will decrease. The benefits of globalization in the long run outweigh the costs of globalization in my opinion.

Cat Potts, Chapter 12, Question 5

After reading the blog posts of some of my classmates, Chapter 12 grows even more intriguing. It's fascinating how controversial the topics of trade and protectionism can be. Personally, I don't understand why protectionism is so pertinent in our society. I think it comes back to pride, as we've discussed before in class, and something that I've talked about in previous blogposts. America doesn't have to be on top all the time. We're actually worse off that way! Keeping jobs in America may be patriotic, but think about the example Wheelan uses with the engineer- their human capital goes to waste if these well-educated workers are spending time doing mundane tasks because Americans are too prideful. I get it; Americans are all about freedom, justice, independence, etc. But what good is pride when it inhibits us from contributing to the rest of the world? "But, Cat, what about the people who get paid practically nothing in another country for creating goods for trade?" Cost of living is also something to be considered. Wheelan uses the example of the worker in Maine getting paid $14 dollars an hour and a worker in Vietnam getting paid only $1 an hour for the same task. But keep it in perspective: How far does a dollar in the United States go, compared to a dollar in Vietnam? After doing some googling (not bing-ing. Sorry, Mr. Hoffner.), I found that most things (rent, groceries, consumer goods) cost at least 50% less in Vietnam compared to the US. Now, I get that Vietnam is just an example and those stats may or may not be accurate and that making just US minimum wage is still not ideal, but the point is that it's perspective. We have to be careful of our pride holding us back.

Sam McDonald chapter 12

While reading chapter 12 I came across the section titled Trade Creates Losers. Previously this year we have mainly talked about how globalization is wholesomely good for the growth and wealth of our country, but this section looks at the other end and in a way gives a face to those harmed by globalization.  This chapter says that we grow, as county, more wealthy due to globalization, but the individuals who lose their jobs don't necessarily end up in a better position. He gives the example of a worker who lost his job as a shoe factory worker to a factory in Vietnam. Wheelen states that this man is poorer now, and may always be. This has got me thinking that even though globalization is good for our country's wealth, is it really beneficial to the individual people?

Caroline Pellegrin, Chapter 12, Question Six

Dear Diary(econ blogpost),

I am a bit distraught. Wheelan concluded Chapter 12 with a quote from Paul Krugman, which states that "the anti-globalization movement already has a remarkable track record of hurting the very people it causes it claims to champion." I agree, overall global trade benefits both parties tremendously, or else the trade would not occur in the first place. When jobs are outsourced to various countries it creates new jobs and helps to stimulate that country's economy.  While being paid 2 dollars a day to make clothes in treacherous factory conditions is inconceivable to most Americans, it is a significant "step up" for many people who have even lower wages, or no job at all. The benefit to the worker is relative.  But my argument, which I will get to, is not relating to wages.  Working in a sweatshop is preferable to child prostitution, but that doesn't justify the conditions that many people are forced to work in.  People, no matter the potential economic efficiency,  should not have to work in an environment that is unsafe to their health. I don't think that's a creation of my naive idealism, but a basic respect for human life.  If a company feels it must compromise the basic safety of its workers over the production of tennis shoes, then their perceived interest should be re-evaluated.  An individual's freedom to work or not work at a dangerous factory does not eliminate the dire need for safety. Okay, that's all!

Yours Truly,

Caroline

Amelia Vayda, Chapter 12, Question 6

In chapter twelve of Naked Economics, Wheelan discusses how trade can make poor countries richer. One example he gives is when the major textile company in South Korea decided to work together with the Bangladeshi workers. Doing so increased the human capital; for example the workers in Bangladesh learned new skills which can't be taken away. After the South Korean company left, the company in Bangladesh did very well because they were given "essential building block" (283). Now seeing how trade can really help other countries, I don't understand how some people are against it. After reading this section I have come to learn how important trade is and why people should be in favor of it. 

Emma Tyler, Chapter 12, Question #7

After reading Chapter 12 of Naked Economics I learned an immense amount about globalization and world trade. I was not aware that some people were against globalization (so much as to actively protest and boycott items that support global trade). When it came up multiple times in the chapter that people were against globalization or for "antiglobalization," I wondered how they could think that global trade is bad. Wheelan then mentioned a Hooters restaurant in Puerta Vallarta, Mexico and a Starbucks in the Forbidden City in Beijing which can be described as "cultural homogenization." Wheelan acknowledges the idea of "cultural homogenization" but then quickly says it "may not be true anyway" because in America we can now watch Iranian movies from our Netflix accounts (286), so it goes both ways. Then Wheelan mentioned sweatshops, here I was sure he would not be able to find an upside to the horrible conditions underage workers had to endure for such little pay, however, he did! The workers are willing to accept such low pay because it is "better than any other option they have" (287). This would mean that in order to help the impoverished sweatshop workers, we, in more developed countries, should buy more from their sweatshops, increasing global trade so the underage workers are not forced to work even worse jobs or live, abandoned, on the streets, or worse be forced into human trafficking. After all these rebuttals to antiglobalization there seems to be no reason to be against globalization because of all the benefits it has the potential to give to all countries, both poor and rich alike.

Griffin Malone, Chapter 13, Question 6

In chapter 13 of Naked Economics Charles Wheelan shows us how good we have it in America. We have a stable effective government institution with no corruption. America continues to prosper economically due to our laws, law enforcement, courts, and tax collecting infrastructure. Most other countries would die to have our government. We need to be more grateful as Americans Andre our democratic government. Corruption that marks other countries discourages foreign investments and misuses resources. Tom Friedman a New York Times journalist points out how unique America is because we don't even need to bribe our government to get a simple permit. I love Mercia.

Kyle Kispert. Chapter 13. Question 3

While examining how the development aid process is broken, Wheelan tells the joke about the chickens and the priest. This story related to an economy and attempts to help it. As the chickens die in the story regardless of the priests suggestions, this hints at an unstable future. Though many steps can be taken to help something, we must be knowledgable about the subject to make a positive difference. From this passage, I conclude that the future can be threatening and dark if we are uneducated. However, if the the peasant would have asked a veterinarian, the chickens might have been saved.

Chapter 13 Sam McDonald 6

I normally don't think about the effects of geography on the wealth of a country, and even when I did it didn't seem to me like there would be a significant impact regarding a countries' geography. According to Mr. Sachs high temperatures and heavy rainfall can be destructive to food production as well as help the spread of disease. Because of this, a majority of the countries in the tropic not classified as rich countries, and have a huge amount of impoverished countries. Furthermore, countries in cooler climates don't have to deal with many of the problems of the tropics and are therefore wealthier. Naked Economics goes on to share some some ideas about how to improve the economy and lifestyle in these poorer countries in the tropic. One idea was to give a monetary prize to whoever could find a cure for certain diseases which maliciously harm both peoples lives and the economy. In conclusion, this section  opened up some ideas as to why some countries are rich while others and dirt poor.

Andre LaRenzie, Chapter 13, Question #6

In chapter 13 of "Naked Economics", Charles Wheelan, the author, speaks on the topic of wealthy and developing economies and countries. Charles Wheelan informs the reader that governance matters. The position of your economy relies on the government, which can be measured by accountability, rule of law, corruption and many more. I found this particular passage interesting because to some degree it is true. I have never thought of the government being a head way to the development of a country, but it is. Living under a government, that for the most part, is honest and not corrupt, makes it easy to take it for granted. Wheelan speaks of the Chinese graduate student who asks if we know "how unusual we are in the world that we don't have to pay off bureaucrats to get the simplest permit issued?" That question seemed surprising to me, because I did not know that it was a usual think in most other places to pay off a government official. This whole passage enlightened me because I never understood that the credibility of a government directs economic growth, and it made me realize how lucky we are to live in a developed county with a healthy relationship with out government.

Thomas Shogren, Chapter 13, Question #6

The passage that struck me as being significant was the part where Wheelan says that just because economists have a theory on how good economies develop doesn't mean that it translates into good economies. When he began to list off similarities of good economies I began to question why we haven't fixed the economies of some countries. Then he used the analogy of Tiger Woods. Just because you can describe how Tiger Woods is a good golfer doesn't mean that you can play like him. Once Wheelan said that I really understood the many problems in trying to help out the economies of poor countries. Just because it is a similarity between good economies, it doesn't mean that it will work for every economy.

Amelia Vayda, Chapter 13, Question 6

In Chapter 13 of Naked Economics Wheelan discusses the differences between the United States of America's government and policies, compared to other countries around the world. One policy that interested me was the property right policy. The example that Wheelan gave was that in some countries property on the poorer outskirts of the developed cities is controlled by the government. People are not allowed to rent it, sell it, or pass it on to family members. After reading this section I thought about how it would be if my grandfather was not allowed to give my family his house. I realized that when we visited that city my family would have to spend lots of money just to stay in a hotel instead of staying in an already payed for house. Now knowing that some parts of countries don't allow you to own your own land or house I see the benefits that Americans have it. 

Caroline Pellegrin, Chapter 13, Question Seven

In Chapter 13, Wheelen offers eleven primary social, political and economic factors that "rich countries" traditionally display. I was struck by how many African countries do not display the majority of those factors. It seems as if Africa is intrinsically at a disadvantage due to two uncontrollable factos: weather and a history of being oppressed by European colonizers. Those two components seem to have direct negative manifestations on the capabilities of many African countries. For instance, many African countries have a tropical climate. This tropical climate, as Wheelan explains, stiffles agricultural production and promotes the spread of disease. A poor agricultural system in turn limits any growth within an economy and places people in very poor heath. Because of this poor climate, crucial factors to having a healthy economy such as trade are hindered. The poor health conditions caused by tropical weathers lessens human capital, which has a plethora of detrimental effects.  Moving on to oppression from European colonizers, joy, joy, joy! Because Africa was a more "difficult" place to settle, European colonizers basically used their African colonies to rape the region of all its natural resources and human labor.  After these European colonizers left Africa, the affected areas were barren and in disarray. European colonization hindered the future stability of African economies and political capabilities.  We continue to see the effects of colonization today.  These two burdens seem sort of inescapable. I am going to water down what Wheelan to conclude the chapter: foreign aid is bad, but it is bad to not have foreign aid.  How on Earth (pun intended?) can we help African countries in a completely effective manner?

Emma Tyler, Chapter 13, Question #4

Charles Wheelan centers around the idea of development economics in the thirteenth chapter of Naked Economics. Wheelan mentions multiple different policies ideas that could be implemented in developing countries in order to make them wealthier, and points out certain factors that some countries are affected by that they can't really change (ex: geography). One developing area Wheelan mentioned in the chapter was Saudia Arabia. I especially liked his simple yet effective answer to increasing their real per capita income growth: invest in "women power" (311).  Wheelan writes that in order for Saudi Arabia to grow economically, they need to invest more on the education of women and allow them to participate more in their countries' political and economic life (after all it is the lowest in the world). Wheelan then went on to site an experiment done in the Ivory Coast which found that when both women and men planted cash crops and had bountiful years, women were more likely to spend their abundant dough on food for their families while men were more likely to spend their overflow cash on drinking and smoking. This experiment did not say this is how all men would act this type of situation, but the majority did, proving to development officials that "if they give cash to the female head of the household, it will do more good" (312). The answer to making Saudi Arabia more wealthy in general is laid out plain and simple in this chapter, however due to the religious beliefs of many people in Saudi Arabia, this fix may not be implemented anytime soon.

jamie dovolis

After reading chapter 11 I was only more intrested in learning about the mass debt that the U.S. has with china. We both need eachother for our econemys to stay heathy, a "unhealthy relationship". We owe a trillion dollers to china, yet china is also woried about it, we have the power to just print off money and cause inflation, significantly lowering the actual amount its worth. Or what if we dont pay it off at all? These extremely large money exchanging, could cause mass inflation or a crash in the econemy, but were dose it leave the citizens? What happens to the american or chiness people? Do we plumit into econmic depression from inflation, dose are money become nothing? Or should we wait, keep the status quo? There are hundreds of solutions that comes with millions of side effects and out comes.

Kispert Kyle. Chapter 11. Question 6

As I first began to experience economical thoughts at a young teenager, I never really understood the debt we owe to China. I always thought that we simply needed money and they gave us some, like a loan. In this chapter it was interesting the way Wheelan explained the structure of the debt. The farm analogy hinted at a lot more structure to this debt than I had previously thought.

Thomas Shogren, Chapter 11, Question 7

In this chapter I learned that the relative value of a countries currency is very important to imports and exports that a country makes, which can affect the countries defficit (or lack there of). If a currency is strong relative to other currencies then it is cheaper to import while more expensive to export. The opposite is true if a currency is weak. I never knew about the severe inflation in Argentina. Many people complain about the inflation in the United States, but compared to Argentina's inflation it is not even comparable. I was also surprised by the "soft" currency in East Germany. If you went to East Germany and exchanged your money, you had no say on what you could exchange it for and if you don't spend all of your money then you are basically giving money away.

Megan Thurow, chapter 11, question 7

After reading this chapter, the thing that stuck out to me the most was the fact that money is not backed by anything worth value. I remember talking in class about how American money is not actually backed by gold but I thought it was interesting that money from other countries is the exact same. Money from all places is just paper and it seems like it really shouldn't  be worth anything too special. I'm still some what confused by how we know how much the dollar is worth compared to say, the Russian ruble. I'd like to learn more about that if we get the chance :)

Cat Potts, Chapter 11, Question

We have all heard the phrase "mo' money, mo' problems" thrown around at some point or another. I think that as a society, we are more concerned with the amount of money that we have rather than what it is actually worth. In Chapter 11, Wheelan raises the interesting idea of what the value of money really means, and that low value isn't always a bad thing. For example, on page 251, Wheelan describes a scenario in which the American dollar value declines. However, in foreign markets, this can actually be beneficial- the prices of our goods (such as Ford cars) looks better compared to that of markets in which the value of the dollar is stabilizing or going up. Therefore, the sales of Ford cars increases, the company makes money, thus raising the amount of money of the company and, if I'm tying this together correctly, the national GDP. Americans have a tendency to panic when we're not in first place, but if you stop and think about it, sometimes being a little behind can actually be a good thing. 

Sam McDonald Chapter 11 Question 6

While reading this chapter I came across yet another economic fact that I previously thought would be different. Previously I thought that if the American dollar grew weaker, then nothing good could come out of it. After reading the section in Naked Economics about the Ford dealer ship I now know differently. It states that when the dollar is weak,  businesses which export goods to other countries who's currency is stronger than the dollar will benefit. How so? In the countries with a stronger currency the price for a Ford Taurus will be cheaper for the people buying it, yet Ford will still pull in the same amount of money. Therefore, everyone one wins. This has completely contradicted my previous thoughts about the weakening of our dollar being ruinous  to our economy, and now I know that neither a weak or strong currency is "good".

Emma Tyler, Chapter 11, Question #6

In Chapter 11 of Naked Economics, I learned a lot concerning the topic of International Economics. The passage I found most interesting was about America's problem with "dissaving"- the farmer analogy. The analogy used two farmers growing corn; one was Farmer America and the other Farmer China. Farmer America had some troubles organizing and rationing out hid corn and needed up with a need to borrow some corn from somewhere else in order to have corn to plant next year. On the other hand Farmer China ends the analogy with extra corn even after he rationed out the amount he need to plant next year. It was helpful for Farmer America that Farmer China had this extra corn to give because then Farmers America got to do everything he wanted. Then Wheelan stops the analogy to describe the problem with this system. I always knew that the US was very dependent on China's goods, which would be detrimental to our economy at some point, but what I did not know before reading this chapter was that the relationship between China and America could potentially very extremely harmful to a China as well if it continues at this rate. Wheelan then mentioned that the relationship between the two will have to end but there are so many ways that it could end, we just won't know until it happens, which is kind of scary.

Caroline Pellegrin, Chapter 11, Question Six

Prior to reading this chapter my thoughts concerning the US currency in relation to the that of the rest of the world were fairly superficial. In short, I knew that the one US dollar was equivalent to less than one euro. Meaning that when I nannied in France, spending money on ice cream (a personal necessity) felt wrong.  I knew that I was paying way more in relation to the dollar amount, to buy an ice cream cone in euros- the dollar is weaker than the euro. Did this prevent me from buying ice cream? No, but it did ensue some economic guilt. What I didn't really understand were the implications that the value of the dollar has beyound myself. After reading this chapter, I now understand that a weak currency isn't necessarily a completely "bad thing." This is because a weak currency makes American goods less expenive for other countries to buy, i.e. good for commerce. But at what point does a weak currency become an utter hindrance? I was left with an unsettled question- like monetary and fiscal policy, to what degree is it "just" for the government to play around with the value of the dollar? Something that, in such a globalized world, will affect each and everyone of us. The hand becomes less and less invisible. Maybe...?

Amelia Vayda, Chapter 11, Question 6

In chapter 11 of Naked Economics, Wheelan discusses the currency rate and how it fluctuates due to the value of the actual currency and the economy. While reading the chapter I found it very interesting that currency rates between countries can change if the value of the currency is weaker and stronger. I also learned that if the economy is in a recession then the currency rates change as well. I never realized that currency rates change. I always thought that it was a simple equation and that a one dollar bill always equals a number that never changes for each currency. Now that I now that currency rates can change I will pay attention to what the rate is before I go on an international trip.

Andre LaRenzie, Chapter 11, Question 6

In this chapter, I found one specific topic very astonishing. Chapter 11 was all about International economics. The author, Charles Wheelan, speaks on the topic of  "evaluating official exchange rates relative to what PPP would predict".  He uses the term of burgernomics to describe this. In 2010, McDonald's Big Mac costed, on average in the US,  3.57$, and 12.5 renminbi in China. That would put the exchange rate for dollars to renminbi at around 3.5. The PPP prediction actually had the Reminbi at around 1 US dollar to 6.83 Reminbi, which is significantly higher. Later on in the passage, Wheelan states that China endorses a policy on "cheap" currency, and that this causes tension between China and the US.  This is where I find it astonishing and amazing and am left with questions. Can China really set an exchange rate like that? And does someone benefit and lose from this situation? Mcdonalds? The US economy? It doesn't sound right, and I can see why this increases tension between the two countries.

Chapter 10 jamie dovolis

This chapter showed me that we have a market economy that is susceptible to failer. It is week to chang   it is aperent taht we are not a completly free market, probaly for the best. Because pelople are irashional and some times don't act with rational self interest. Im glad that people are there so that we dont have an epicnomic crash. Then agen this board has alot of power. They controle so much of our countries money, they can twist and turn our country. Can we put our trust in them?

Cat Potts, Chapter 10, question 7

The Federal Reserve is far more involved in the economic world than I had previously thought. Going into this chapter, I imagined the Federal Reserve as more of the "master bank" than actually being in charge of managing inflation and other important factors. In a sense, it is a sort of master bank, but not in the way that most commonly would presume. Another part of this chapter that was new to me was the importance of balance, and how there can certainly be too much of a good thing. For example, extreme inflation can be incredibly dangerous for the economy. Generally speaking, inflation is a positive factor, as it represents economic growth. However, in a situation such as the 1970's, as Wheelan mentioned, too much inflation must be balanced out so as to not result in an economic disaster, which is where the Federal Reserve comes in to play. The Federal Reserve keeps our economy from falling apart.

Kyle Kispert. Chapter 10. Question 6

In chapter 10, I found the footnote about low and negative interests rates interesting. Through this chapter I learned about the federal reserve and interest rates, and concluded that regulations of money are also making money. Because of the footnotes about a negative interest rate stood out to me. I would never has guessed that an interest rate has ever been negative. This financial crisis must have been very dramatic. It would be interesting to study past interest rate changes and patterns.

Thomas Shogren, Chapter 10, Question #7

During this chapter I learned the about the roll of the Federal Reserve. As a kid I thought that the government should just print off more money and give it to the poor in order to help those who are in bad situations, but obviously that would be a terrible idea. If the government printed off more money then the value of the dollar would go down causing inflation, which would cause even more economic downpoor. I didn't realize the importance of the Federal Reserve and the difficult decisions they have to make in terms of their economic decisions. If the Federal Reserve makes a bad decision there can me major inflation/deflation which can cause a major disaster in terms of the economy.

Megan Thurow, ch 10, question 2

in this chapter of naked economics Charles Wheelan discuses inflation and its effects. Something that effected me was the comparison of the PT cruisers and Chrysler. I found it interesting that the same thing that happened to the company happens to our economy in general. One point was when there is a high demand for labor the union will demand higher wages. I thought that was interesting how you can compare a company to the economy.

Griffin Malone, Chapter 10, Question 6

      In chapter 10 of Naked Economics Charles Wheelan explains the Federal Reserve's responsibilities monitoring large amounts of money and being the "credit tap" for our economy. The Federal Reserve has a large responsibility to the country and our economy. The Federal Reserve has to keep our economy working to its full potential and the maximum efficiency. They have to feed enough credit to the economy to create jobs. The Reserve must create small recessions to limit inflation in the economy. The Reserve stimulates and controls the economy through the banks and credit. The reserve stimulates the economy by lowering the cost to borrow money from banks. 

Caroline Pellegrin, Chapter Ten, Question 6

It seems as if the invisibe hand has grown much more apparent. Throughout this course I have belived that we are very much governed by a free-market, but after Wheelan describes the power and implications of the Federal Reserve my opinion has been altered (though I do realize that the FR is separated from direct government imposition and that there is an valid need for it). Prior to this chapter my view on the Federal Reserve was hazy a best; I kind of imagined it as a dozen men, around the age of 50, sitting in a vault of money. I was a bit off. Infact, the Federal Reserve is far greater than that. It has the primary goal of handling monetary policy, in simple terms controlling interest and inflation rates. They set the "speed limit"of the economy and budget the prescribed inflation limitation accordingly. In other words, the Federal Reserve literally has our economic prosperity in their own hands. With a faulty lending decision or negligent inflation control the economy can easily be set into a spiral. What if Ben Bernanke has a bad day? He is only human! There are so many things that are utterly unpredictable in our economy. I was a bit relieved and freightened that the position of the Federal Reserve chairman was appointed. For one, that keeps the president from being able to fill the Federal Reserve positions with people that will act according to his or her own will, but on the otherhand it makes the actions of the Federal Reserve far less transparent. These individuals wield an enormous amount of power, yet we have virtually no say in who they are. How can we be sure that they aren't strategically aligning themselves with other banks and industries? This chapter challenges how much economic free will we really have.

Amelia Vayda, Chapter 10, Question 6

In chapter 10 of Naked Economics Wheelan brings up the branch within the Federal Reserve called the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC). This branch specifically works with interest rates. There are two distinct ways to stimulate the economy by lowering the cost of borrowing. The first tool is the discount rate and an example Wheelan gives is when Citibank's discount rate falls they can borrow from the Feds at a low cost, which then lets them lend at a cheaper price to their customers. Another tool that banks use is borrowing from other banks, for example when Wells Fargo lends money to Citibank. Learning about these two distinct ways to help customers borrow money from banks has showed me that it takes a lot more work to get a loan. It also showed me that there are more people involved than I initially thought. I had always thought when I was younger that you could just walk into a bank and receive money but after reading this passage I have developed a better understanding of what it really takes to receive a loan and that it takes a committee and the bank to develop the loan. It just doesn't come from a bank teller. 

Andre LaRenzie, Chapter 10, Question #6

As a child I always thought, "Why can't we just print off more money to satisfy the needs of the poor population from around the world?". This is a misconception that many children I am sure dealt with. Also, with my parents being uneducated with Economics, I was never given an answer until we read Chapter 10 of "Naked Economics". Chapter 10 deals with the Federal Reserve, and how they regulate the "money supply" and "credit tap". There is a passage early on in the chapter that answers the question above. Charles Wheelan explains that if the Federal Reserve cuts tax rates and create a lot more money, then inflation will occur, and making it impossible to supply the poor population with money. When new money is created, high demands for products arise, and the companies are unable to keep up with the demand, so the only option would be to raise prices. Now this would keep happening if money kept on being created. The economy would be a disaster. So because of chapter 10 in "Naked Economics", I am finally relieved, and illuminated by being educated of how the Federal Reserve regulates money, and how it is impossible to create money for the poor. At least my ambition and selflessness were in the right place, just not my logic.

Emma Tyler, Chapter 10, Question #2

In Chapter 10 of Naked Economics, Wheelan describes the Federal Reserve and their responsibilities. The main job of the Federal Reserve is to control "the money supply and therefore the credit tap for the economy" (219). Preventing inflation or deflation is a very important job the Federal Reserve has, and I learned that inflation/deflation is an important issue that, if present in our economy, could affect my life. Wheelan uses the extreme example of terrible inflation in Germany after the first World War. Wheelan writes that "In 1921, a German newspaper cost roughly a third of a mark; two years later, a newspaper cost 70 million marks" (231). If inflation was happening in the US today I would be directly affected at the age I am right now, and if inflation occured when I was older. Inflation has the power to completely put an economy in shambles and it could lead to a downward spiral of events that would also be harmful (things like unemployment). Reading this chapter made me understand that the Federal Reserve plays a very important role in our daily lives, though we may not notice.

From reading this chapter i learned alot mostly on GDP comparing ours to other contires. This is to see how much we are growing compaired to japan or any other contire. In the begining of the chapter there was a joke made back in the 70's about how japan would one day rule the world, but ass there poplutation became older ther growing GDP levled out. This made me think, at the end of the chapter it said our demographic was geting older, just like japan was. bringing up the question, is our econemy going to plato like japans did as our age contrie's age incresses?
The change in what contry is growing the fastes switches constantly froum the US to Japan, and now china, i curious to know what contry will be next in growth.

Kyle Kispert. Chapter 9. Question 7

At the end of this chapter Wheelan brings up the issue of people's happiness, after listing all the economic factors of Americsn society. Although total national happiness doesn't have a numeral scale, I believe factors like unemployment, poverty, income equality, and size of governments could possibly play I part in it. Although personally, happiness isn't limited to being successful economically. Economics undoubtably plays a part in everyone's life but people define their happiness differently and can therefore become happy different ways.

Cat Potts, Chapter 9, Question 6

The passage that grabbed me the most in this chapter was the perception with which many people approach prices in the market. Wheelan mentions grandmothers complaining about expensive chicken, when in reality the proportion of the dollar value of a chicken and the amount of time it takes an average American to pay for a chicken has decreased exponentially over the last century. This is so fascinating, as we as a culture are so used to griping about the prices of things and the bad economy and basically anything else we can think of that might be going "poorly". But, in retrospect, things are so much more affordable (monetary cost-wise) than they have been in the past. So, why do we spend so much  time complaining if we are actually better off than we used to be? And why is it that so many people are unaware of this change that we've seen over the past century?

Amelia Vayda, Chapter 9, Question 6

In chapter nine of Naked Economics Wheelan brings up examples of how much money we earn today in the twentieth century compared to the nineteenth century. One example he uses is how many hours people would have to work in order to buy a cell phone in the 1900's. It would have been around 456 hours, but now people only have to work nine hours in order to buy a cell phone. This quote and some of the other examples interested me because in today's time we don't necessarily think of how we are going to pay for some of these items like cell phones because we are making more money in less time so everything seems more affordable. Another example that Wheelan brings up is our ability to earn lunch. In the 19th century people had to work most of the morning just to earn lunch, but in today's society we just go and buy lunch without even thinking about cost because we know it is affordable. To me I think society takes advantage of the amount of money earned for granted. In today's world less people are counting their money and determining if they can buy lunch or a cell phone whereas now people without thinking sometimes just go out and buy what they want. 

Thomas Shogren, Chapter 9, Question #7

During this chapter I was reacquainted with the term GDP and learned some of the analytical uses of GDP, some of the vital signs of the economy, how the most recent recession came into effect, and how the economy can be stimulated during a recession. I found it very interesting that GDP can be used to quantify how an economy is either growing or shrinking. Some of the vital signs of the economy that are listed in this chapter are unemployment, poverty, income inequality, size of government, budget deficit/surplus, current account surplus/deficit, national savings, demographics, and total nation happiness. One of the big factors in the most recent recession was the crash in the housing market. I found it very surprising that spending will help stimulate the economy while saving can cause the economy to fall further into recession. I believe that this chapter has broadened my perspective on the most recent recession.

Andre LaRenzie, Chapter 9, Question #7

In the chapter entitled Keeping Score in the book "Naked Economics", the author, Charles Wheelan, brings up the topic of calculating growth and the size of economies of countries. He first states that the GDP is an easy way to measure economic growth and size, but there are plenty of "knocks" against it. A tremendous sized knock against GDP is that it doesn't measure happiness. Many scientists performed studies, and concluded that money does not result in happiness. This has broadened my view of a personal issue on money. Growing up I always thought that it was essential to make a lot of cash, so I could sustain a healthy and comfortable lifestyle. This is now dismissed because scientists recommend "experiences over commodities". Overall, the GDP of your country does matter, but is that all you look for to determine who has an economic power? Many things aren't measured in GDP, such as happiness, which should be measured because it does add to economic wealth if you are Keeping Score. 

Sam McDonald Chapter 9 Question 6

An interesting passage that I came across while reading chapter nine was the section about how GDP is measured. Normally I would equate the wealth and the growth of a country due to its GDP. But in reality, GDP per capita only accounts for how much goods and services are produced (divided by the country's population.) This means it doesn't take into account several important economic factors. A more holistic and realistic view of a nations wealth would take into account economic activity that isn't paid for, such as work that is done at home. Also is would take into account the degradation in the environment. An excellent example that Naked Economics cited was China; China has experienced a extremely fast growth in GDP in the past decade. But what its GDP doesn't take into account is how much of the environment China has destroyed, or the extent which it has polluted its cities (a majority of the top polluted cities are in China). Overall, I found that this passage was interesting because it made me realize that GDP sometimes shouldn't be the only way one measures the wealth of a country.

Caroline Pellegrin, Chapter 9, Question 7

Not only did Chapter Nine define the GDP and the financial market of the United States, but I think it also addressed many common "economic misconceptions" that I had. The primary misconception being that the United States' economy was in a horrible place. Yes, in 2007-2008 we did experienced significant economic downturn relating to the housing market, but its not as if it was (is) unmanageable. The Obama Administrations' response to the situation, while not entirely flawless, did do a lot to improve the nation's economic disparity. Obama instituted several fiscal policies to prevent  further job loss, assure the American populace and bolster the economy. Obama's best choice? Not instituting a ton of monetary policy, which would lessen the nation's economic growth and make people and banks shy away from making anymore loans. Finally, although we experienced a major economic depression, we are still doing pretty well in terms of overall GDP growth. If we can employ policies and decisions to make the "ups and downs" of the curves more smaller- our economy will be even more manageable.

Kyle Kispert. Chapter 7. Question 2

The entire concept of financial markets affects our lives daily – both directly and indirectly.  Every time we buy something, its price is impacted by finical markets.  Every time we invest or put money in savings, our lives are affected now and in the future by the financial markets.  Nearly every decision we make, there is an underlying affect and influence of the financial markets on its final outcome.  There seems to be so many, that all of the affects of the financial markets on our decisions is immeasurable.

Kyle Kispert. Chapeter 7. Question 6

The discussion and concepts of "the market lemons" was very intriguing and memorable. As a potential car buyer in the not so distant future, I am now keeping in mind how price and age of a car can determine its value. There are three ways of thinking when deciding what age and price to buy a car at. The first would be buying a new car with a higher cost thinking that it hasn't gone through the abuse that would cause repairs. Secondly, buying a young used car thinking to save money on the initial cost and that it hasn't had time for abuse that would need repair. Lastly, buying an old used car for a low price thinking that the saved money will be used for repairs. In the end there is no way of predicting how short or long a car with run for before needing a repair. There are many factors that play into this, such as how rough you are on the brakes or transmitting. It's an interesting topic that many are pationate about but has no clear answer.

Kyle Kispert. Chapter 5. Question 6

I found the study of the students from Ivey league school future salaries versus non- selective schools very fascinating and important. Contrary to popular belief, this study concluded that it wasn't the quality of the school that made as much of a difference than the quality of the student. Wth all these letters and college fairs trying to convince the public that their college is unique and the best in the country, this chapter was very relatable with a high school seniors life right now. It reassured me that my focus should be on doing my best in school and fitting into a college, rather than finding the most prestigious college and putting all my money into going there. In the end it's up to each individual how successful they will become.

Kyle Kispert. Chapter 1. Question 5

In this chapter, Charles Wheelan makes the claim that we shouldn't impose preferences on people whose lives are different than our own. He gives the example about South Americans cutting down trees to sell and provide for their family and buy malaria nets. Since in this case it's more of an American preference to save the environment, that we shouldn't pay these South American families to stop cutting down these trees. I'm my opinion this is a poor example for explaining where we should impose our preferences on others. Rather I think people all over the earth have a few preferences I'm common, such as health. In this example trees are healthy for the whole planet and if South Americans can provide for their families with some money from the U.S I believe this would be beneficial, if the U.S. is willing to pay.

Kyle Kispert. Introduction. Question 7

In the introduction, Charles Wheelan gives an example of a government policy that backfired. The program set in place by the French government in 2000, was described as faulty simply because the officials didn't have a solid grasp of fundamental economics. More specifically they didn't account for the jobs that were created when attempting to boost employment. This story made me realize the importance of economics and that economics should be considered before any decision is made. It doesn't matter the scale of the decision, economics will play a large role

Emma Tyler, Chapter 9, Question #4

Chapter 9 of Naked Economics had a focus on measuring the success/failure of country's economies. Wheelan explains that the usual tool for measuring an economy is the GDP or gross domestic product; however, Wheelan also goes on to explain that this is not the most helpful thing to measure. GDP "represents the total value of all goods and services produced in an economy" (193). If an economy's GDP goes up it means that the country is producing a larger percentage of goods and services than it had before, which is a good thing for the prosperity of an economy and an important figure to analyze yearly. But it is not all rainbows and butterflies with GDP. GDP does not truly measure "how well off [people] consider [themselves] to be" (198). The happiest people are not necessarily the most wealthy. GDP measures the amount the economy is growing, but not the actual quantity of happiness/success the citizens of that economy feel. Wheelan recognizes that GDP is flawed and questions why the world can't find a better way of measuring economic progress. Within the next sentence of this question, he comes up with an answer that Marc Miringhoff suggests- a "social report card." A social report card would measure 16 social aspects of the economy (child poverty, crime, affordable housing etc) and give the country an overall grade of how they are doing based on their smaller grades in those categories. Sounds good right? Well some conservative commentators disagree with what should be measured; some economists would rather measure out-of wedlock births, participation in church groups, divorce rates etc. So the social report card, which would probably be implemented by the governmental economic specialists, seems like the perfect solution to solving the economic progress measurement debacle, but officials need to agree upon what must be measured first.

Megan Thurow, chapter 6, question 2

In this chapter of Naked Economics, I began to relate to the issue of people in poverty compared to those like Bill Gates, who have more money than I could even imagine. Don't get me wrong, my family is not in poverty. The reason I feel like I can relate to this is because of a project I'm currently working on in Capstone. The project has to do with suffering and my topic is poverty in the United States mainly among veterans. What really hit me was when Charles Wheelan talked about Alex Rodriguez and how he earns about 275 million dollars in ten years for playing baseball, which requires no college degree. I also found it interesting that when Wheelan asked the Nobel Prize winning economist how he felt about making less money than Rodger Clemens, he said it didn't bother him. Personally I would think that if I won the Nobel Prize I should be making more than a man that I don't even think went to college and if he did, probably didn't pay for it. I found this part of the chapter to be the most interesting because I relate well to baseball and also now to the problem of poverty. (And how crazy is it that 13 percent of Americans are poor?) This is one of the biggest things I've taken out of the book as a whole. 

Thomas Shogren, Chapter 6, Question #6

Chapter six talks about human capital and its role in the economy. An example that is used in this chapter is stripping people of all of their assets and leaving them on the side of the road. For example if Bill Gates was left on the side of the road along with a drug addict, who would turn out the best? In almost every case Bill Gates will turn out better because of his human capital. Bill Gates has the skills to help others and will most likely become employed. The drug addict will probably not get hired and if he does Bill Gates will still have the better job. Another example in this chapter is a society in which all the people are farmers and a guy with a Ph.D. in agronomy comes into town. The agronomist can help create a better plow making himself better off along with the farmers. This leads to a growth in the size of the pie of the economy, not an increase in the size of the slices. As human capital rises the society will tend to evolve.

Cat Potts, Chapter 6, Question 3

The concept of human capital in and of itself is not necessarily a controversial one. However, it is the means by which human capital cycles with little room for growth and expansion to others that is problematic. The economic gap between the rich and the poor grows larger everyday. The divide will only continue to swell, due to the vicious cycle that Wheelan discusses:  Those with better educational opportunities can pay for their children to be educated, and their children will (generally) earn the degrees and  skills need to make enough money to pay for the education of their children, and so on; meanwhile the poor cannot afford to send their children to school, so they receive fewer opportunities to refine their skills and stay in the same economic situation as their parents, and so on. The cycle spirals, heading in opposite directions for either party and leaving little room for an opportunity for change. This is both unfair and counter-productive. The wealthy spend their excess funds on goods they don't necessarily need, while the poor can't promise their children any education after high school. Granted, that doesn't mean it's impossible for a person to get out of the vicious cycle, but the chances are not in their favor. Meanwhile, the money that the rich are spending on yachts and summer homes could be used to fund the education of those who can otherwise not afford it. The education of the poor then leads to the creation of more jobs, as the skills they obtain become worth more money, which they can then save so that future generations can have greater opportunities. As Wheelan mentioned in the metaphor of the farming community, the "pie" grows, rather than being resliced. As long as people are willing to spread the wealth around, there's no reason why we cannot begin to close the gap. However, is it likely that the wealthy man with the yacht will sell it so that some kid he's never met will just maybe have better opportunities? Probably not.

Sam McDonald Chapter 6. Question 6

A specific passage that stuck out to me in chapter six of Naked Economics was the passage about the labor fallacy. In a previous blog post I wrote about how the French government failed to understand this fallacy, but that passage did not explain the specifics. So when I came across this passage I my interest was sparked. The analogy used was a community of farmers who produced just enough to sustain their livelihood, but nothing more. If someone came into the community looking to farm, they would send the person away because that individual has no human capitol with which he could benefit the community. In this same community, if a man with a PHD in agriculture came in he would be accepted and would in turn create new jobs due to the capitol he could provide. (i.e. plows). This analogy can be applied to the real economic world. Since there is not a fixed amount of jobs, immigrants to the U.S. are  not actually "taking our jobs". Rather if they bring human capitol (education, entrepreneurship, etc.), then they have the potential to increase the jobs with in our country and create an ascent in our economic standing.

Griffin Malone, Chapter 6, Question 6

In chapter 6 of "Naked Economics" Charles Wheelan teaches us about the productivity and human capital. He shows us there us a strong correlation between a country's level of human capital and economic well being. While there is a weak correlation between natural resources and a good standard of living. Countries like Japan and Switzerland have little amounts of natural resources yet they have a higher per capita income due to higher amounts of human capital that result in large amounts of productivity and wealth. Other countries like Nigeria and Saudia Arabia sit on billion dollar oil fields but the populations standard of living is very low there. The natural resources often corrupt government control and can fuel civil wars. This shows us why human capital and education is so important to succeed as a person and a country.

Caroline Pellegrin, Chapter Six, Question Four

In Chapter Six, Wheelan attributes the increasing wealth gap to the enlarged gap between those who have a tremendous amount of "human capital" and those who do not. Human Capital is defined as "the total sum of skills embodied by an individual." Think of human capital as what you are left with if your entire house was destroyed in a natural disaster. You are not left with your Mercedes or you expensive TV, but rather your character, skills and knowledge (relative to secondary education). Having human capital is what separates the so called "burger flippers" from the Bill Gates' of the world. Wheelan believes that the best way to solve this problem is to invest and support education; I am of the same mind. As noted in the chapter, when Taiwan doubled their female high school graduation gap the country's feritility rates dropped to almost a half. Those girls will move on to get jobs, start companies and expand the economy. Hopefully, they will not be burdened by a life of total poverty as they try to raise children at such a young age. This solution will work because there aren't a set amount of jobs in the economy, meaning if more people get higher education they won't be "stealing jobs." Infact their education will lead to further economic growth, more creation of jobs and the expansion of new technologies. Education expands the pie- it is not a detrimental reslicing of the pie. I love pie. Thus, the further education of many individuals is an investment for us all. Now lets go educate young women and men equally, social AND economic justice!

Amelia Vayda, Chapter 6, Question 6

In Naked Economics Wheelan discusses an experiment that involved dropping off 100,000 high school dropouts on a corner in Chicago and how businesses dealt with the extra amount of laborers who are less skilled. Then they dropped off 100,000 graduates on the same corner and looked at how the businesses reacted. When the high school dropouts were on the corner everyone wanted them to leave or be supported by the government because the skill level was not high enough for the  businesses to employ them. When the graduates came they would get jobs instantly because their skill level was useful. If they didn't get a job they would just start their own company or move to a different place. This part of the chapter was very interesting because all that businesses really care about is your skill level, but for people who come from poor families they might not be able to go to college to become more skilled. This experiment showed me how jobs require specific skills when hiring new employees, and it comes down to if the person dropped out in high school or if they got a degree from a college.  

Kyle Kispert. Chapter 6. Question 2.

The point Charles Wheelan brings up in ch. 6 about how the economy is evolving is very relevant to us as seniors. As we pick a college and ultimately a career, the skills we decide to learn and use will  affect our lives greatly. These days low skilled jobs get taken by most commonly robots and computers. The thought of having my job taken from me will stay in the back of my mind in these next years as I will be pursuing a profession. The economy gives more of an incentive for pursuing a computer science or robotic profession. However, the author concludes that even low skilled jobs have a place in this economy too. At this point we have the option to pursue a low skilled job and have competition or a ghosh skilled job and creat opportunity.

Andre LaRenzie, Chapter 6, Question #7

Chapter 6 of "Naked Economics" by Charles Wheelan was all about Productivity and Human Capital. I learned from this chapter the importance of investing in human capital, or the skill that one brings to the table. This has broadened my view as a society, because I now understand that a nation must work together with each other's skill to improve life. Charles Wheelan spoke of two options at a farm, a man with no skill will not be offered any work at the farm, but when a man arrives with skill that may benefit the farmer, he will be cut a share of the land, plus what he has to offer to benefit the farmer. This leaves room for surplus for the farmer,which can be spent to hire more jobs, and bring more human capital to the farm. This made me ultimately realize how important skills are, and more importantly, how useful it is to get a degree, so someone may invest in your capital. When someone invests in your capital, it improves life for others, and yourself, as you can now make a profit from your certain skill.

Emma Tyler, Chapter 6, Question #6

Chapter 6 of Naked Economics had a focus on the importance of investing in human capital, and with this topic came the question of the whether or not economic development is a "zero-sum game". The answer is no. There is no need to have poor people in order to have rich people. Economic development is all about increasing the size of the pie rather than just re-slicing it (the pie metaphor was used quite often in this chapter). One of the most interesting sections I found in this chapter was regarding the slicing of the pie. I found the excerpt about the survey that was done by Robert Frank (Cornell economist) to be especially intriguing. In the survey, respondents had to choose between two worlds. World A where you make "$110,000 and everyone else earns $200,00;" or world B "where you earn $100,000 and everyone else earns $85,000." (144) I was out to dinner with my parents tonight, for their 18th wedding anniversary, and while we were on the topic of my classes, we began to have some discussions about economics. I presented them with both of the options the survey just mentioned gave and they both chose World B. The book later goes on to explain that either the respondent wants a world where they are all together richer (in one world they make $110,000 and in the other they earn $10,000 less) or where they are richer than the majority of the others in the community; however when I asked my parents why they chose World B, they both said because it was more equal than World A where there was a $90,000 difference between employees whereas in World B there was only a $15,000 difference. Now, it may be because my dad was an economics major in college, and my mom was a politician (who, of course, had to deal with economic issues quite often, and understand them), but I think the majority of people are really just worried about having a more equal slice of pie than everyone else. At the end of the chapter, Wheelan mentions that if a country were to find a way to better "mobilize and apply" their human capital, they would "be the big winners of our age." (147) In that situation, less people would be impoverished (more equal pie slices) and a richer economy in general would be the outcome.

Griffin Malone, Chapter 8, Question 6

In chapter 8 Charles Wheelan discusses the power of organized interests. The situation Charles pointed out about the barbers and electricians really stood out to me. He raises a very interesting point about state licenses in job professions. The state of Illinois requires barbers and manicurists to have a state license to work while electricians don't need to be licensed. Mr. Hoffner brought this topic up in class because it is ridiculous that you need a license to paint nails while a guy wiring a house doesn't need a license. This is because working profession groups seek organized interests and are then unified as a group with licenses. Electricians prefer to slip by the government to make themselves better off without government interference and regulations. This is a minor flaw because a bad electrician could do a bad wiring job and burn houses down. While barbers an manicurists are held to a standard under the government licenses because they prefer having organized interests.

Thomas Shogren, Chapter 8, Question #2

The issue brought up in this chapter is the question of why our increasing knowledge of public policy doesn't always turn into a perfect government. The issue is that while running for president the  canidates don't neccesarily make the right decision that will help the economy, but instead make the decision that will help them receive more votes and increase their chance of winning the election. The issues affect my life both now and in the future because the decisions that the canidates make can help me but also harm me. The repercussions of their decisions affect me everyday even if I don't notice it. An example of this would be the Iowa caucuses. The canidate subsidizes corn so that he/she can receive the votes from farmers in Iowa. In a way this helps me since ethanol (made from corn) has cleaner emissions but it also costs me money since my taxes go to pay for the subsidy and the government will lose revenue since the tax on ethanol is cheaper than the tax on gasoline. Although this typically affects me indirectly it is still a cost to me and many others for the benefit of fewer people.

Sam McDonald Chapter 8 #6

An area that surprised me while I was reading this chapter was the section on ethanol. Normally I would argue that using ethanol as a substitute to oil is substantially beneficial to our economy and the environment. Apparently ethanol is potentially even worse for the environment, even not including run off from pesticides, and has cost the treasury $7.1 Billion. With this knowledge, the most presidents and presidential candidites still allows for ethanol subsidies. Why? because Iowa is extremely important to the presidential race, and corn is important for Iowa. Therefore, a great majority of presidential candidates support ethanol substitutes and keep them in place. This is surprising, yet understandable at the same time.

Amelia Vayda, Chapter 8, Question 6

In chapter 8 of Naked Economics Wheelan discusses government policies, one example that he brings up is farmers and how they are given federal government subsidies. They were given subsidies because in the times of the wars the yarn from mohairs were used to make military uniforms. Farmers are still gaining Federal Government money. Later on in the chapter he brings up how agriculturists in other counties like China and India do not get subsidies they are forced to sell their crops below the market price because the government wants the "urban dwellers" to get food at a cheap or low price. These passages about policy for farmers were interesting to see because in a large population the farmers have to sell their goods but with no help from the government, but in the other countries who have a smaller populations the farmers are getting help from the government. To me this is partly fair and unfair. Countries with large populations should have subsidies because the government can gain more money through taxes. Since the farmers in these larger countries are forced to sell their crops at lower prices they are making less money which in turn can hurt the farmers financially. As for the smaller counties I believe that it is still fair to give subsidies to the farmers because everyone gains from it. Since they are getting subsidies then they can still ask for less money for the crops which means that more people can buy them. It also means that the farmers are not putting themselves in a financial crisis. This whole view on how different countries give out subsidies is memorable and interesting.  

Emma Tyler, Chapter 8, Question #7

In Chapter 8 of Naked Economics I truly learned about the power of organized groups. I learned that small organized groups will generally be more successful in getting what they want as opposed to larger groups whose benefits would me more widespread. These small organized groups (like Ethanol or Mohair farmers) can be more influential in our society than I imagined. At one point in the chapter Wheelan starts to expand on their power and he mentions that these organized groups are capable of preventing something called "creative destruction." At first I was confused as to what the term creative destruction meant because it sounds like it is a bad thing for the economy but once explained through the scenario of the Pony Express being destroyed by the invention of the telegraph, I realized that "creative destruction" is a necessity for the economy and society if it wishes it grow and become more advanced. However, these small organized groups can "stop...creative destruction in the first place." (185) If the small group "chain themselves to their congressman's office door seeking protection," it might be more effective than the creative destruction taking place in which case the economic benefits that come with such competition would be widespread, which as was mentioned before is not preferable for having a successful organized group.

Andre LaRenzie, Chapter 8, Question #6

In chapter 8 of "Naked Economics", Charles Wheelan speaks on the topic of the power of organized  interests. In particular he speaks about the licensing of teachers. Existing teachers highly advocate to have stricter regulations regarding the up and coming teachers. Of course these regulations would be exempt from existing teachers. This would ultimately lower the number of teachers across the area, leaving benefits for the existing teachers. (Benefits unknown, if I missed discussion on the benefits of having a smaller number of teachers, please comment.) The author states that when Albert Einstein came to New Jersey, he wouldn't of been able to teach high school physics because he did not have a license. Which I found preposterous. Next, the author went into collected data in which he concluded that 1) good teachers matter, and 2) Certification doesn't matter. This leaves to point out that teachers who advocate for raising regulations on licensing students who aspire to be teachers, are only looking at benefits for themselves, and not as a society. I found this interesting, because teachers are said to be the most important part about the structure of America, but by this topic, it seems as if that some teachers only think in self interest. Which is appalling and surprising to me. I am not saying you are like that Mr. Hoffner.

Megan Thurow, ch 4 question 6

Chapter four of naked economics talks about the government and how it effects the economy. I found the passage about the vendor at the white sox game very interesting. I had sort of a hard time understanding what the meaning or point of the passage was at first. I thought it was interesting how Wheelan compared the making of  the margarita maker that I pant needed to how the technology used to make this can be very useful to make things that could be more useful to people. It could lead to new inventions coming from an un useful item.

Sam McDonald Chapter 4 #6

An interesting view that was presented in chapter four of Naked Economics was the idea that cutting taxes would, in the long run, raise the total revenue of the government. The first time I came across this passage I had to re-read it since it seemed counter intuitive to me. Although many people would argue for my initial thoughts, the opposing side does have a valid argument. Cutting taxes helps the economy by putting more money in the pockets of individuals and stimulating hard work. Both of these things help the economy grow, and potentially the economic growth could surpass the revenue lost in taxes, making cutting taxes an logical decisions for the government. Consequently, Raising taxes generally makes individuals change their behavior in ways which effect the economy negatively. Although both of these things are true, in the majority of circumstances a government can not cut taxes and expect money for programs to go up.

Amelia Vayda, Chapter 4, Question 5

In chapter 4 Wheelan discusses how the government regulates certain parts of the economy. One example that he gives from a different book Capitalism and Freedom by Milton Friedman is that people believe that lawyers should have a less restrictive admission to the bar. Which in turn allows lawyers to practice even if they are not the smartest or the most knowledgeable. Some people believe that they need lawyers to be the best of the best, but others believe that because of everything we use lawyers for we don't necessarily need the best lawyer. It still struck me that lawyers were deciding/talking about allowing lawyers who were not as brilliant to pass the bar because in this time with all the things that you need lawyers for, it could be detrimental to someone if they got less than the best of the best. To me I agree with the people who say that we should have "Cadillac Lawyers" (88).

Andre LaRenzie, Chapter 4, Question #6

In chapter four of "Naked Economics", Charles Wheelan speaks of the government and what it does for the economy. He contrasts private and public sectors to discuss how the government affects the economy. He said that in Private sector, the market tells us where to put our resources. He used an example of a vendor at a baseball game that made a portable margarita maker. This increased social benefit, but was it necessary? No. The engineers who invented the margarita maker could of put their resources to better use with feeding starving children, or building roads in underprivileged countries. But that's not the case because the government is not telling them what to do, which ultimately makes me questions whether the government should direct resources or not to improve an economy. I found this passage significant because I have hopes of becoming a successful engineer one day, and I only hope that my job will include benefits to underprivileged people or places, and not making useless items such as an automatic margarita maker. It also opens my mind to the thought of government directing what I create as an engineer, as long as I am doing good for others.

Thomas Shogren, Chapter 4, Question #6

The passages that I found intriguing were the passage about corrupt politicians, lowering tax rates and its effect on revenue, and the controversial use of DDT. I thought that it was sad that politicians would put their personal interest above that of an entire nation. Politicians are in place to help run the country, not destroy it. I originally thought that if taxes were cut just a little bit then the revenue would go up because more people would pay taxes and work more. However after reading this chapter I learned that this is not true. The final thing I found interesting was the controversial use of DDT. DDT is the most efficient pesticide as well as the cheapest, but it is the most dangerous. Some people believe that it should not be used because it is not safe. However economically speaking it should be used because it is efficient and cheap. It also saves many people's lives from malaria. While looking at making decisions people have to look at the oppurtunity cost and weigh that into their decisions.

Kispert Kyle, chapter 4, question 1

The topic of government regulations is brought up in this chapter and discussed through the brief story of Gary Becker and striped bass. This is another one of the countless examples in this book about how a regulation was set in place to help but actually had a negative effect. This story of the striped bass makes me think about which goods may become obsolete if they are regulated incorrectly. It's stories in like presented in this book that makes me want to do more research. I'm curious about what goods are regulated and if any incorrect regulations were not noticed until it was too late. These regulations directly affect my life both now and in the future and after reading this chapter I will pay more attention to other regulations.

Caroline Pellegrin, Chapter Four, Question Six

Prior to my reading of Chapter Four I understood that the government did not always act most "efficiently" or in a way that isn't totally impartial, but I did not understand to what extent. I was especially shocked at the passage that discussed both the stricter licensing for manicurist and doctors- both of which were implemented to undermine the potential success of new entrepreneurs and workers. The government was deliberately stifling capitalism and new economic growth and change. Capitalism would dictate that if one manicure salon will charge six dollars for a manicure and the other will charge twenty-five dollars that it is up to those salons to compete and perhaps negotiate, not the government. In my opinion, during this example the government was exerting too much of a strong hand, a partial hand at that. Now I feel a bit skeptical, what other policies is the government implementing that exhibits that same type of burden? How often does the government side with wealthy enterprises in order to gain more wealth and success for themselves?

Emma Tyler, Chapter 4, Question #5

Chapter 4 of Naked Economics is entitled "Government and the Economy II." The previous chapter ("Government and the Economy") was all about the positive aspects of government involvement in the economy, while this chapter focused on the negative aspects. The question of whether or not the government should be involved in economic decisions is quite the controversial topic. It seems that nowadays many people correlate conservative Republicans with lessened government involvement stance and liberal Democrats with more government involvement regarding economic decisions (large generalization). As much as I would have liked for Wheelan to finally come to make a statement at the end of the chapter saying: "If you were a smart, economically thinking citizen, you would think blankity-blank-blank about government involvement", he does not. Wheelan simply says "Is the role that government plays in the United States economy too big too small, or just about right? I can finally offer a simple. straightforward, and unequivocal answer: It depends on who you ask." (100) Some economists think the government plays too large of a role already, others think that it doesn't play a large enough role, and still others think it is somewhere in between at the moment. I can safely say that after finishing this chapter I am more confused about my view of government involvement because I have now seen a glimpse of both side's arguments. I don't quite know where I stand as of right now on my opinion of government involvement, but I do know that there are positive aspects to government involvement (that are very necessary sometimes), and negative aspects. I am just not quite sure how (or even if it is possible) to create a healthy balance that would also make everyone happy at the end of the day. Economists have it tough.

Thomas Shogren, Chapter 3, Question #7

This chapter talks about externalities, both positive and negative, and the role of the government in a market economy. When making decisions I have only thought about the costs that I will have to deal with. In reality many of the decisions I make affect others as well. These costs are externalities. Sometimes my decisions are good for others making it a positive externality, while other times my decisions are bad making it a negative externality. The government steps into these situations in order to issue a rule in which my decisions are either made more expensive or cheaper. I never thought about the role of the government in my decisions because they are not telling me what to do, but the invisible hand of the government affects my decisions every day.

Emma Tyler, Chapter 3, Question 7

In chapter 3 of Naked Economics, Wheelan discusses the topic of the necessity of government in the market system. While there were many examples in the book that discuss incentives (the SUV vs. Honda Civic dilemma) and externalities (fits within the SUV debate too), I found one of the most interesting topics in the chapter to be the philosophical aspect of economics. Wheelan specifically mentions that there are some things that come up in economics that cannot be solved with an economic thought process. He brings up a question posed by Amartya Sen (1998 Nobel Prize winner)  about having only one job to offer and three men up for the job who are equally qualified. In an economic sense, the employer would want to "make the world a better place by hiring the man who needs the job the most" (76)- Externalities!- but if the one man is the poorest of all three, the other is newly poor and not accosted to his new lifestyle, and the other has a chronic health problem. Who gets the job? Shouldn't the answer be an economic one? But it's not! This is the line where economics and human morals/philosophy come in. Additionally, the government aspect rears it's ugly head again. Economic questions (at first glance) of the world come up and then the question of whether or not the government should get involved in some way, and then another huge question comes up: "should government protect people from themselves?" On another note, I am extremely interested to see the opposing argument on government involvement in the next chapter because this chapter's argument for government was very strong.

Kyle Kispert, Chapter 3, Question 7

This chapter put into words what happens on a daily basis. Externalities without a doubt effect everyone but I had never though about issues like these in the way that this book presented. Externalities take place on various levels from two individuals to the whole world. Once I understood how they work I realize how similar the concept is on different levels. As Wheelan talked about the externality of co2 emissions, I had a lightbulb moment. The quote "And it's arguable that some people in cold climates will benefit from climate change, so maybe they should pay me" was really a breakthrough for me on how everything is connected and effects more than you see on the surface.

Sam McDonald Chapter 3 #6

While reading Naked economics and listening in economics class, I have come across significant evidence which has lead me to think that if government would just disconnect itself from the economy, the economy would be better off. Contrary to my credence of the government and the economy, Naked Economics shows that in order for there to be a market economy the government must make it possible, and a lack of a government is much more detrimental to the capitolist market than the presence of one. The rules of the market are set and enforced by the government. Without these rules in place, a market would end up in shambles. An example in the book is the economy of Angola, which although has enough natural resources to be economically stable, are in an economic peril because the government has not supported a market economy. Although many people, like myself, often think that the interfering of the Government is detrimental to the economy, the reality is that we need government intervention in order to sustain a market economy, as well as set up rules such as copyright laws which protect the existence and effectiveness of the market economy.

Chapter three, question 2

Chapter three of  Naked Economics, it talks about a family that needs to buy a large car for space as well as safety. I can relate to this because in my family there are three kids and none of us like car rides. We need a car that is big enough for all of us to ride at the same time. When buying a new car this summer, my moms biggest concern was safety. That was the first question she asked for every car we tested. The book talks about putting a tax on large cars because of the amount of pollution but I don't think it would be very effective. I think people would still buy large cars because of the safety factor. Large cars are much safer than say a smart car.

Amelia Vayda, Chapter 3, Question 2

Throughout chapter 3 Wheelan discusses the positive and negative externalities of large cars to smaller more environmentally friendly cars. He gives an example of a family with children who are more inclined to buy a large car not because it is environmentally friendly, but because it is safer in some aspects. The family gives a list of what they want in a car and most of them are for safety reasons, but they realize that their is no social benefit to them. They don't necessarily care if they are polluting more CO2 or even causing problems with asthmatic kids. They really only care about the car being the safest. Wheelan also discusses the ideas of incentives in the fact that people who buy larger cars should pay more tax on gas and for the size of the car because they are polluting more CO2 and are bringing greater risk to smaller cars if they are in an accident. This issue directly relates to me and my family mainly because in my family it is a rule that the car has to be a larger car like an SUV because it is safer on the road if you were to get into an accident. If I were in a smaller car like a Mini Cooper I would be placed in a dangerous spot if I were to get into an accident with a large SUV. This issue can also affect me now and in the future because when and if I have a family I would consider both positive and negative externalities on buying a larger car but put more emphasis on safety.  

Andre LaRenzie, Chapter 3, Question #6

Chapter 3 of "Naked Economics" is about the Government and the Economy. The author, Charles Wheelan, discusses the topic of externalities in this chapter. He defines externalities as private behaviors that have social costs. There was an example that shocked me. The example of Cigarettes having both positive and negative externalities left me amazed. I though there wasn't a way that cigarettes could have a positive externality because it causes so many deaths, indirectly and directly, but there is. Smokers generally die younger than non smokers. The early death of the smoker leads to the social security being uncollected, and returned to the government. On average the government gains 148 million dollars of smokers dying young. I found that truly amazing, and somewhat disgusting.

Caroline Pellegrin, Chapter Three, Question One

I could go ahead and make the blanket statement that everything discussed in this chapter affects me both directly and indirectly, but I won't because that's sort of a cop- out. More specifically, I have chosen to examine the subject of "free riders" and its implications, as presented by Wheelan in the later half of the chapter. I have come to realize that I am not only affected by the acts of "free riders," but that I am, in fact, a free rider as well. On a basic level, I depend enormously on the research and findings of other people, not a day goes by where I don't research something for school or use an equation created by someone else to solve a problem. On perhaps a more direct and questionable level, I admittedly am a free rider of the Chipotle enterprise. I use the indifference of the workers and opaque water cups to get "free" carbonated soft beverages, a form of "free riding" or more arguably stealing. My question is, what separates not paying "the Current" to listen to the radio from actually physically stealing a t-shirt at a store? What is the primary factor that differentiates the two acts? Do we, as basic free riders, have an obligation to feel remorse, or is the corporation at fault for not making us pay for the service. I should feel remorse from my fairly self-deprecating Chipotle beverage acts, but should I feel remorse for listening to Beyoncé's recent album on Youtube instead of purchasing it? Free riding seems to be a hazy form of economic transportation.

Emma Tyler, Chapter 2, Question #6

In Chapter 2 of Naked Economics, Charles Wheelan covers the broad topic of incentives and how they effect the choices that consumers and producers make. The one example that was particularly illuminating for me regarding the broader topic was that of the "prisoner's dilemma" mentioned on pages 44 and 45. Wheelan illustrates with this example how incentives and greed are very closely linked. In the situation of the  prisoner's dilemma, both prisoners have been "arrested on suspicion of murder" and their options are to either 1) one prisoner rat the other out for the murder (either prisoner could do this) gaining the snitch a light 3 year sentence and the accomplice a life sentence, 2) both confess to the murder- gaining a 25 year murder sentence, or 3) neither give any information about the murderer and both get off with a 5 year sentence. What ends up happening is both confess to the other being the murderer, so bothe end up with the 25 year sentence, as opposed to the possible 5 year sentence they could have gotten if they had both shut up. Sometimes greed and working with only your own best choice in mind then both you and anyone else involved closely with your situation  with be worse off. It seems that Wheelan is saying that we should always act with our rational  personal self interest but also equally think about the effects that our actions can have on others around us. It seems difficult to act  in this way because sometimes one would  have to make some decisions which at first would  not be benefitical for him/her but would benefit others and thus them later in life, but it seems extremely difficult to think in this way.

Thomas Shogren, Chapter 2, Question #6

The passages that I found interesting in this chapter were the passages about babies safety in planes, cashiers stealing from restaurants, and green taxes. People wanted to make planes safer for babies by requiring them to use carseats. However by doing this they require families to buy an extra plane ticket which is expensive. Due to this more people will drive than fly which is much more dangerous than flying. The second situation is the one in which restaurants put signs up that say if you don't get a receipt your food is free. At first thought you would think that this would cause restaurants to lose money but actually it saves them money. By making sure that all customers receive receipts the restaurant is able to stop cashiers from pocketing money by not printing a receipt. The third situation is green taxes. I believe that the green taxes are a great idea because they will provide revenue as well as decrease the harm done to the ecosystem.

Cat Potts, Chapter 2, Question 6

Incentives influence every decision we make. As we  discussed early on in class, people act based on rational self-interest. Not necessarily because humans are selfish in nature, but because we want to do what makes the most sense for ourselves. On pages 36 and 37, Wheelan mentions the airplane scenario that we talked about the first week of class. Now that we've learned about supply and demand and we've started to talk about marginal personal and social costs/benefits, everything is starting to come together. Incentives are by far the most fascinating aspect of economics, especially when interpreting what kind of outcome an incentive can produce. What was particularly striking to me was the London congestion fee, on pages 38 and 39. Despite all that it affected (traffic, average speed, number of bus passengers), the revenue was significantly lower than what the government would have preferred, because people were acting in rational self-interest. If driving in times of congestion means that you have to pay a fee, naturally fewer people would drive. It seems bizarre to me that those imposing the fee wouldn't consider that revenue would be lower if fewer people chose to just drive and pay the fee. This is why economic thinking requires looking at the situation from every possible outcome before making a decision. Perhaps they could have found a way to impose the driving fee while still making enough money, had they considered possible consequences of their actions.

Kyle Kispert Chapter 2 Question 6

I found the story about the FAA attempting to protect children very interesting and significant. Child safety is an issue that some people are passionate about yet one idea to help actually would have a negative impact. It makes you think what else is done to help the common people but actually hurts them. It's also a good example of how extensive economic thinking needs to be to ensure a positive outcome. Incentives can be deceiving and you can't be narrow minded in assuming outcomes. As this chapter referenced what economists think, it makes me wonder what an economists profession is like. Do they sit in a cubicle researching and publishing their ideas or do they produce their ideas from the field?