Nice interactive graph on the prevalence of smoking in the US...PLEASE tell me WHY anyone under the age of 30 would freely choose to smoke. I really would like to know...

Smoking in America---Go HERE to view this interactive map on the prevalence of smoking in the US by frequency and age groups.  In this day and age, with all the available information, I do not understand why anyone under the age of 30 would smoke. I am not even factoring in the price of cigarettes, which by itself should be a deterrent...

Which Christmas would you prefer? The one from the good ol' days of 1964 or the Malthusian days of 2010?..The choice is easy for me.

After a discussion with my dad about his income in 1964 and the "good ol days" I did some thinking:

Bottom Line: For a consumer or household spending $750 in 1964, all they would have been able to afford was a console color TV from the Sears Christmas catalog. A consumer or household spending that same amount of inflation-adjusted dollars today ($5,300) would be able buy able to furnish their entire kitchen with 8 brand-new appliances (refrigerator, freezer, dishwasher, range, washer, dryer, microwave and blender) and buy 9 state-of-the-art electronic items (laptop, GPS, camera, home theater, plasma HDTV, iPod Touch, Blu-ray player, 300-CD changer and a Tivo recorder). And of course, even a billionaire in 1964 wouldn't have been able to purchase many of the items that even a teenager can afford today, e.g. laptop, GPS, digital camera.

As much as we might complain about high unemployment, high taxes, a huge deficit, we have a lot to be thankful for, and we've made a lot of economic progress since the 1960s as the example above illustrates, thanks to the "magic of the marketplace."""

Project Presentations Begin Jan. 10th!!!!!!!!

You can find a copy of the project on the website. 

Christmas is the deadliest Holiday of the year! Be careful out there....

Be careful out there!! Looking at the graphic, it is amazing to see the change in deaths over Christmas/New Year break...Am I too morbid?

"""A new U.S. analysis of mortality rates during different times of year found that people are more likely to die during the holidays — notably on Christmas and New Year’s Day — and researchers cannot explain the yearly spike.
After analyzing all official United States death certificates over the 25-year period between 1979 and 2004, a trio of sociologists identified an excess of 42,325 natural deaths — that is, above and beyond the normal seasonal winter increase — in the two weeks starting with Christmas..."" Source HERE

Graph comparing US Defense spending with other countries...Is there room to cut, and is there room for other countries to pull their own weight? Just askin'...

Is there room to cut defense spending? I just sayin'...Why will it not be cut, in my humble opinion?  Defense spending, MORE than any other industry, affects EVERY Congressional district in the US.  Whether it is a Liberal or Conservative district it does not matter.  Politicians are of the same mind on this one, regardless of political ideology.  I am open to contrarian opinions.  Where am I going wrong?

Why The United States Of America Is Broke

BusinessInsider

I don't endorse the political view on the war(s)  that accompanies this graph (below). I am neutral on that point for the purposes of this posting.  However, to put the Defense Dept budget off-limits for a cost-benefit analysis is something I don't endorse.  Everything should be scrutinized for WTF! (Waste, Theft, Fraud---what were YOU thinking....)... 

""Greedy politicians willing to accept bribes to get reelected, support massive defense budgets. Defense contractors as well as those receiving handouts from defense contractors label anyone not in favor of wars and massive military spending as "soft on defense". With massive fearmongering campaigns, including pictures of nuclear bombs going off, those organizations are able to whip up public sentiment to do whatever they want, which essentially is to spend more on defense. Every soldier in another country is another soldier that needs to be equipped. At election time defense contractors donate massively to candidates willing to waste more money on needless wars that do not need to be fought. Over time, legislative bodies in general get packed with politicians accepting bribes (campaign contributions) from warmongers.

Unfortunately, "compromise" is such that taxpayers get stuck with the worst of both. We have baseless wars and untenable defense spending. We also have untenable collective bargaining rules, untenable social handouts, and untenable union wages and benefits.""....Source HERE

Be Sure to Thank Me After You Make That First Million!! The link at the end of the article is very interesting as well.

December 21, 2010, 1:54 pm

When Good Teaching Pays Off

By CATHERINE RAMPELL

Earlier this year my colleague David Leonhardt wrote about a new study that found that a good kindergarten teacher can drastically improve students’ future earnings. On that basis, an especially strong kindergarten teacher is arguably worth about $320,000 a year, which is the present value of the additional earnings that a full class of students can expect to earn over their careers.
Now another working paper, by Stanford’s Eric A. Hanushek, gets similar results, arguing that a minor improvement in teacher quality could have dramatic effects on test scores, especially as they compare to those of other countries. From the abstract:

A teacher one standard deviation above the mean effectiveness annually generates marginal gains of over $400,000 in present value of student future earnings with a class size of 20 and proportionately higher with larger class sizes. Alternatively, replacing the bottom 5-8 percent of teachers with average teachers could move the U.S. near the top of international math and science rankings with a present value of $100 trillion.

So does that justify paying teachers more money? Only if pay can be directly linked to effectiveness, Mr. Hanushek writes, a task our educational system has not yet been able to master:

This paper has concentrated on the demand side of the teacher labor market. The underlying idea is that knowing the impact of teacher quality on economic outcomes provides immediate information about what kind of rational changes in teacher incentives and salaries are economically desirable.
Unfortunately, we know little about the supply function for teacher quality. Thus, it is not possible to predict what kinds of pay changes would be needed to ensure any given quality of teacher force.
The standard arguments for performance pay suggest the potential value of differential pay based on effectiveness in the classroom. We actually have little empirical evidence about how to structure any such pay systems or about what the effects might be. The evidence presented in this paper simply suggests that the economically appropriate rewards for particularly effective teachers in the context of a performance pay plan could be very large.

For more on the relationship — or lack thereof — between education spending and student outcomes, see this post on the latest PISA scores.  source:  nyt.com

Christmas is the deadliest Holiday of the year! Be careful out there....

Becareful out there!! Looking at the graphic, it is amazing to see the change in deaths over Christmas/New Year break...

"""A new U.S. analysis of mortality rates during different times of year found that people are more likely to die during the holidays — notably on Christmas and New Year’s Day — and researchers cannot explain the yearly spike.
After analyzing all official United States death certificates over the 25-year period between 1979 and 2004, a trio of sociologists identified an excess of 42,325 natural deaths — that is, above and beyond the normal seasonal winter increase — in the two weeks starting with Christmas..."" Source HERE

Did you get a Flu Shot this year? If you did not, then you really messed up the market for flu vaccine. See the supply and demand analysis within! No, it is not as bad as having the flu, I promise...

WSJ: Flu-Shot Demand Droops; Prices Fall

""Drugstores, supermarkets and some doctors' offices are slashing prices or offering other kinds of deals on flu vaccine this year amid weaker-than-expected demand.


Last fall, hordes of worried parents, pregnant women and others drove demand for a limited supply of H1N1 flu vaccine as the swine-flu pandemic spread across the country, eventually infecting an estimated 61 million people in the U.S. and killing more than 12,000.


Demand for the separate, seasonal flu shot also was strong, largely because of the hysteria surrounding H1N1. Most venues ran out of seasonal flu vaccine by early November.


This year, supplies of the seasonal flu shots are bigger than ever: Manufacturers produced and distributed 163 million doses of the vaccine, compared with the 110 million doses distributed last year. Retailers and doctors' offices stocked up, pushing inoculations earlier and harder in the belief that heightened awareness of flu and a new government recommendation that all Americans over six months of age should get inoculated would drive strong demand....""

A couple of things are going on here that affected the market for flu shots.  There was an anticipation that the demand for flu shots would be greater than last year because of the swine flu epidemic and an increased awareness of the dangers of not being inoculated. In response to this anticipated demand, manufacturers increased the supply of vaccine, relative to the quantity produced last year. This is ripe for a basic supply and demand analysis...with graphs!!! 

The first graph shows the market in equilibrium BEFORE the market shift in demand and supply. Using the numbers in the article, the market price is $25 and the market quantity is 110 million, point "A". Assume the market "clears" at this price and quantity. 

The next graph shows the INCREASE in Supply of Flu Vaccine.  The Supply curve shifts to the RIGHT (S* to S1) to show that at every price, the quantity supplied of vaccine is 53 million units GREATER, relative to S* (163 million vs 110 million).

Simultaneously, we will assume the presumed anticipated increase in demand occurs. In the next graph, the demand curve shifts to the right (D* to D1), indicating that at every price, the quantity demanded of vaccine is 53 million units GREATER, relative to D* (163 vs 110). 

Our market is back at the same equilibrium price ($25) BUT at at higher market quantity (163 million), point "B".  It all works out, right???

The article suggests that Demand did not respond as anticipated for a variety of reasons.  Lets assume that Demand did NOT shift all BUT retailers and doctors did not recognize this immediately and the try to maintain the $25 price for the vaccine.  How does this affect the market?

Our market is out of equilibrium. Let's clear the clutter of this graph and look at simplified one below. At $25 the quantity demanded is 110 million units (point "A"), but the quantity supplied is 163 million units (point "B")--Quantity Demanded does not equal Quantity Supplied! In fact the Quantity Supplied EXCEEDS the Quantity Demanded by  53 million units, which means we have a SURPLUS of vaccine.

How does a market "clear" this surplus?  Shown below, by decreasing the price and moving ALONG the DEMAND curve (point "A" to Point "C") increasing the quantity demanded at the lower price. Moving ALONG the SUPPLY curve (Point "B" to "C"), decreasing the quantity supplied at the lower price. A new market clearing price ($15) and market quantity (140) are established. 

Full Disclosure: I am 41 years old and have never had a flu shot. I am playing with fire, I know.  Hmmm....what is the unseen consequence of this?.....Oh, right,....DEATH! Guess I should go get one...

Nice graphic on how colors affect our purchasing decisions...I hate that I am so gullible!!!

Most popular Gawker Passwords that were hacked...Even I am not this bad...

Nice graphic on how some things have changed since...

"Technology use by the masses has really taken off in 10 years...Quite incredible if you stop to think about it...The price of gas intrigued ..."

All I want for Christmas is for students to properly label their graphs...Really, that is all I want...

 All I want for Christmas is for students to properly label their graphs...Really, that is all I want...

We don't have a trade deficit with China anymore!! So why all the protectionist talk?

Well, it has not been entirely eliminated, but is it nearly as bad as it is portrayed? As with many (most?) economic statistics, Gross Domestic Product (GDP) accounting is very imperfect and often misleading measure of a country production of goods and services.  Finished goods are called "outputs" and all the components that go into making the finished good are called "inputs". GDP does not count the market value of inputs because they are not in their "final end-use condition"--they are just on their way into making a final good.  This is not really a problem if all the inputs are produced in the same country they are assembled.  The problem arises when the supply chain becomes globalized and the component parts come from multiple countries. Under traditional GDP measure, the country at the end of the production chain gets full "credit" for the market value of the good, even if they contribute very little to the overall value of the good.  The point of the article below is that this distorts the trade situation with China, which in large part is the final assembly point for lots of high-value inputs produced elsewhere.  The i-Phone is used as an example of how GDP accounting affects the trade balance with China.  The inputs are high-value production and the assembly is low-value.  However, the countries that produced the high value items get no GDP accounting credit for what they produce, ONLY the GDP debit for importing it and consuming it...Perhaps a new measure of GDP is in order to keep up with globalization???

WSJ: Not Really 'Made in China'

Trade statistics in both countries consider the iPhone a Chinese export to the U.S., even though it is entirely designed and owned by a U.S. company, and is made largely of parts produced in several Asian and European countries. China's contribution is the last step—assembling and shipping the phones.


So the entire $178.96 estimated wholesale cost of the shipped phone is credited to China, even though the value of the work performed by the Chinese workers at Hon Hai Precision Industry Co. accounts for just 3.6%, or $6.50, of the total, the researchers calculated in a report published this month.

Which is better for the environment, fake Christmas trees or real ones? The answer may surprise you...

NYTIMES:  How Green Is Your Artificial Christmas Tree? You Might Be Surprised

""Kim Jones, who was shopping for a tree at a Target store in Brooklyn this week, was convinced that she was doing the planet a favor by buying a $200 fake balsam fir made in China instead of buying a carbon-sipping pine that had been cut down for one season’s revelry.


“I’m very environmentally conscious,” Ms. Jones said. “I’ll keep it for 10 years, and that’s 10 trees that won’t be cut down.”


But Ms. Jones and the millions of others buying fake trees might not be doing the environment any favors.


In the most definitive study of the perennial real vs. fake question, an environmental consulting firm in Montreal found that an artificial tree would have to be reused for more than 20 years to be greener than buying a fresh-cut tree annually. The calculations included greenhouse gas emissions, use of resources and human health impacts.


“The natural tree is a better option,” said Jean-Sebastien Trudel, founder of the firm, Ellipsos, that released the independent study last year""

“You’re not doing any harm by cutting down a Christmas tree,” said Clint Springer, a botanist and professor of biology at Saint Joseph’s University in Philadelphia. “A lot of people think artificial is better because you’re preserving the life of a tree. But in this case, you’ve got a crop that’s being raised for that purpose.”
Which is better for the environment, fake Christmas trees or real?  If you are trying to conserve trees, then fake is the way to go. But if you are trying to conserve resources overall and minimize your "carbon footprint", then the choice is not so clear...

Getting medical care for peanuts. No, really, getting medical care for peanuts..It is a sign of the times...

This is what happens in the extreme when people and institutions lose faith in the currency.  Zimbabweans have essentially abandoned their currency and are using various commodities for exchange purposes.  Local heathcare providers have established a price list  that gives a commodity-to-US Dollar "exchange rate"...See photo below...

NYTIMES: Zimbabwe Health Care, Paid With Peanuts

""People lined up on the veranda of the American mission hospital here from miles around to barter for doctor visits and medicines, clutching scrawny chickens, squirming goats and buckets of maize. But mostly, they arrived with sacks of peanuts on their heads....""