Bennett Pope, epilogue, Question 5

One passage that caught my attention was when Wheelan said "if we are to make the best use of these tools, we ought to think abouth where we are trying to go." I think we have reached a point where we let the economy drive us, not making sure we drive the economy. We have become so focused on making money that that has become our goal, and, newsflash, it won't make us happy. Where are we trying to go? And how do we need to get there? We need to ask ourselves this question if we want to be happy in this country.

Eleanor Oakman. Epilogue question 5

A passage that I found interesting was during the part where Wheelan is discussing the future American system. "The American system is a richer, more dynamic, more entrepreneurial economy - and harsher and more unequal." This passage struck me because being a senior in high school I can't help but wonder what the American system will be like when I most likely am involved with it. As time goes on American and it's economy is forcing itself to get bigger and bigger, even if that means damage to some people.  This is what is so intimidating about finding decent jobs, paying the bills, and putting food on the table. As a young person I can't predict correctly how competitive the economy and the job market will be, but I am guessing, like how Wheelan predicted, it will be "harsher and more unequal."

Lily Bjorlin, Epilogue, Question 2

In the epilogue, one of Wheelan's questions about life in 2050 is about putting pleaser and aesthetics above income. One of his examples Anthony Lewis talking about how in Italy there are still small family farms and vineyards despite them being economically inefficient. They are beautiful both for their visual aesthetic and for the history and culture they preserve with them. My favorite quote from this passage is "There are values of humanity, culture, beauty, and community that may require deviations from the cold logic of market theory." Much to the chagrin of my friends, I love little small towns and family farms in the countryside. There is something so pleasing and relaxing about the simplistic beauty of it and Everything is less hectic and there seems to be such a sense of community and togetherness that is being lost in more urban areas. Every summer my family goes to Sawyer, MI for a week. Sawyer is a drive by town on the lake on the way to Kalamazoo. There are a bunch of little family farms growing cherries, grapes, soybeans, corn, and of course blueberries. Though it would be more profitable for one big corporation to buy a bunch of land and start cranking out blueberries, the families who live there would suffer and that tight knit community they have would be broken. I believe it is important to hold onto those "old" values of family and respect and handwork that are often found in old timey small towns, even if they don't directly contribute to helping grow the market economy. I'm not saying big corporate farms are a bad thing because they most definitely aren't but they shouldn't completely take over the entire farming industry. They can just stay in Iowa.

Christen Majors Epilogue

I am excited for the time to come when time will be more important than money.  As I can only speak from my personal experience in America (also backed by Wheelan) I will say in general Americans are always going and working and doing. The epilogue of Naked Economics is called Life in 2050: Seven Questions and primarily focuses on the implications on the future. There is a economic theory called the backward-bending labor supply theory gives me hope for our future in America. It gives me hope that we soon we will not have to work like we are on the clock 24/7, like hamsters on a wheel and that we will feel safe in doing so. It gives me hope that my children will have less stress than I or my parents have. Although economics is not the all-knowing and doesn't give us the answer to everything, it does facilitate a better understanding of things like human nature, wealth, poverty, discrimination, and politics.

Epilogue, Question 5 Laura Bartz

The part that I found most interetin was when Wheelan asked "Will the family of a baby girl born tomorrow in rural India have an incentive to invest in her human capital?" Feminism and gender equality have come a very long way in the last century and the amount of investment that has been put into women and girls has risen at an unforeseen rate. I think about questions similar to this on a daily basis, but how long will it take for human capital to be given to girls without a second thought? And when that time comes will it be because gender is not a part of the equation anymore or will it be because that is the smartest decision wight the least opportunity cost, financially and socially?

Caroline Paulsen, Epilogue, Question 5

One of the passages that I found interesting in the Epilogue (starting with the question "Will we have strip malls in 2050?") discussed the possibility of a shift in values in the future. Charles Wheelan writes about how, at some point, society may begin to favor things of culture, community, or aesthetic beauty (such as small-scale, economically less viable farms in Italy) rather than simply amassing wealth in as efficient a way as possible. I found it interesting how, in some ways, by growing wealthier, humans can be drawn to sacrifice some of that wealth for things that are "inefficient" and could even be considered as anachronistic. Likewise, in the more developed parts of the world, tasks that used to be necessities (baking, gardening, etc.) seem to increasingly be becoming hobbies instead.

Matúš Kočalka, Epilogue, Question 5

Mr. Wheelan has done a great job by mentioning some interesting thoughts concerning the future Economics. For me the most interesting part was the one when he said that: "Time will become more important than money" 

Nowadays the world is driven by the supply and demand, and people often think just economically. We focus on our future savings, finances, jobs, duties etc. We are overwhelmed by the massive amount of work that we have to do, and that is usually very stressful. At the same time, people are slowly trying to go back - to live within their communities, to spend time with their families and friends and to focus on the spiritual life. We are also continually moving outside of the stressful city environment. Time is slowly becoming more and more important, and people are starting to realize that money isn´t everything. I hope that in my future life, I won´t be dependent on how much money do I make, but on what life do I live. 

Adam Hano, Epilogue, Question 1

In the Epilogue Charles Wheelan explains what will our society's main concerns be in 2050. What was the most interesting for me was the question about productivity. Charles makes the case that if the productivity grows (as now is growing) then we will have to choose whether to work the same for more wealth or work less for the same amount of production as today. 

Furthermore, Charles brings back the question of Inequality. Today, still more than billion people live on the edge of poverty. How are we going to solve this problem in the future?

Collis McKenzie, Epilogue, Question 2

In the epilogue Wheelan closes his book by once again stating that economics is nothing more than a tool. It does not shape who we are, but we use it to help achieve the goals we set. Economics is not a self-driving car. We cannot just set it and forget it, we still need to steer it. The long- and short-term consequence of thinking of economics as more than a tool is a misguided dependence on the market to guide our actions. Wheelan states that productivity gives us choices, but we still have to make them, and to me that's frightening because, good or bad, people often make the choice that is either not economically sound or serves them at the expense of others. I guess we just have to cross those bridges as we come.

Nathan Rowley, Epilogue, Question 5

The most interesting part of the epilogue to me was at the very end when Charles Wheelan introduces a quote from Simon Johnson, who "noted, 'Overborrowing always ends badly, whether for an individual, a company, or a country.' During the first decade of the new millennium, three parties borrowed heavily: consumers, financial firms, and the U.S. government. So far, two have paid a huge price for that leverage. Is there another shoe to drop?" The culture of limitlessness that Wendell Berry speaks of is the cause of such overborrowing, and two of the three levels of society in this nation have already seen the consequences. And although the U.S. is still within a zone of relative safety with the size of its debt, the country will eventually fall if society continues to blind itself to its own limits.

The fourth and largest level of society, that of humanity in its entirety, is also overborrowing, in this case from the planet. The agreement that was just ratified in Paris is a step in the right direction, but as with the U.S. debt, it will fail if countries do not take Earth's tolerances seriously.

Tens of thousands of years ago, Homo Sapiens evolved and humanity entered its infancy. We developed agriculture and settled in villages, which grew into kingdoms and empires as humanity entered childhood. Young children don't like to share, and so it was with the various groups of humans for more thousands of years. The Enlightenment and the Industrial Revolution brought us into our adolescence, and we engaged in risky and rebellious behavior just like teenagers: we chewed the rainforests like tobacco, and we experimented with different social norms (each generation seems to have their own set). We also learned a lot through science and other areas of study, just as you and me are learning now in high school. Now we are about to enter adulthood, and assume the responsibilities that come with it; it is time for humanity to do the same.

Epiloge, Question 6 Marin

This might have been on of my most favorite chapters just because I liked how it did't necessarily inform me a lot of facts about economics, but rather started asking questions which then made me really think about human nature and our future for economics. The question that struck me the most was "How rich is rich enough." This I feel like can really describe a common issue or theme in American culture. A lot of people may be working towards the American dream, go to college, get a job, get married, buy a house have a family ect. Also when a person says "I wanna be rich" and then you follow up with "Oh how much do you want to make or have saved." Do they actually  know? There is no end game. I feel like human greed can take over and lead to a never ending game. Instead, we should measure things like happiness, love, and stress. I mean there really is no way to measure these, but if people start using " I wanna be happy" when I'm older, I feel like it will pave a more enjoyable path for them. Maybe once we do reach the rich-enough stage, we might be able to step back and analyze this more. Also as I read and saw that there will come a day when we work so much that we eventually will work less. I am so excited for that day. I hope it comes within the next few weeks.

Jack Bexell, Chapter 12

Absolute Advantage vs. Comparative Advantage

In the chapter Wheelan talks about Absolute Advantage by giving an example of Saudi Arabia. He explains that it's about how when 2 countries have a good crop of different goods, when they trade, they trade their crops fairly. It could be indirectly, like the example of Microsoft to rice, but there is still that one for one trade. At the end of the explanation he compares Saudi Arabia to Tiger Woods, which kind of dates the book in a whole, considering Tiger Woods became a sort of untouchable subject...

Comparative Advantage was shown with an example of Bangladesh and Seattle. The engineers of Seattle have doctorates in their craft, and are therefore more qualified to make shirts and shoes, but then they would be spending their time making those shirts and those shoes, instead of making Boeings, and important software. In turn, the people of Bangladesh who are poorly educated make the shirts and the pairs of shoes.

The way Wheelan describes both of these different advantages in the market place in very visual and grabable ways.

All This was done at 10 PM at school^

This Explanation makes the understanding of the concepts a lot easier for me.

Jacky Xu,chapter 12,question 6

"Trade is good for poor countries,too."
When we are thinking about the trading with a poor countries we might think that the poor countries will lose what they have and getting unfair trade,but, in fact,trade give poor countries a key to open a bigger world.Many countries in South Africa get much better by trading with the big countries like US,China,and the trade made the people there much happier.Globalization makes the world much more equal,it makes poor richer,at the same time,keep the rich rich.

Chapter 12 question 6

I found that it was kind of funny that India, after they won their independence and were a more isolated economy wanted a spiral on their flag to shows that they were economically sufficient. I think this is a perfect example of how people's pride can get in their way of becoming successful. I'm sure after India was free for Britain, they wanted to show everyone that they were slef sufficant so the best way to display that some may think is closing themselves off from others. However, ironically enough, one India opened up their economy and trade to the resort of the world, it was a even greater booming success! I feel like this is interesting because it can apply to people outside of economics. I lot of times people won't ask for help and want to be independent, but they they do open up, the help of others and help everyone successes more.

Matúš Kočalka, Chapter 12, Question 6

In this chapter, Mr. Wheelan states that the "trade and globalization" are very beneficial to us, because it makes us better off. Moreover, he says that the Asian sweatshops enable us to achieve this profit. "Productivity is what makes us rich. Specialization is what makes us productive."

In other words, by trading with the poor countries, we enable the people who live in the more progressive ones to specialize on their work and to achieve the productivity. Since they don´t need to care about making the clothes, because someone else does it for them, they can fully focus on inventing e.g. flying car (Slovakia), and thus to make all of the people eventually better off.   

And people who make the clothes - e.g. assembly workers in Bangladesh, are specialized in their labour and that´s something what they can provide us. 

Thanks to the productivity, which is accomplished by the specialization, this world can continue growing, and it´s becoming even safer place than it´s nowadays. 

Adam Hano, Chpater 12, Question 6

In Chapter 12 Charles Wheelan explains how trade makes us all richer and why it is a good long term solution to outsource “easy” jobs to third world countries. He explains that by outsourcing the jobs wealthy countries gain, because in the long run it creates new jobs in their countries too.

For the past few months a pizza place in White Bear Lake was trying to open a new pickup place. However, they were unable to find new workers for a long time. Nobody in White Bear Lake wants to hand out pizza anymore. What would happen if third world countries would become richer, and the people would not be willing to have jobs in call centers or clothes manufacturers? 

Jack McGillivray, Chapter 12, Question 3

Something I found extremely interesting was how the problems posed by globalization have such unintuitive answers. For example, if one doesn't like sweatshops the logical thing to do is stop buying products produced in them. However, this will only worsen the conditions for the people employed there. Sweatshops, even though they have awful and sometimes inhumane working conditions, build the wealth and human capital of poor countries. Another issue with similar circumstances is carbon emissions by third world counties, such as China and India. Previously the solution i would propose to this problem was issue an ultimatum to force a cut in emissions or face economic sanctions. However now I see that this may not only be ineffectual, but may actually exacerbate the problem. I think the ideal Wheelan proposes, a universal carbon tax, may work well, but would be extremely difficult to implement. Globalization has many drawbacks that come with it, and it is tempting to resist it in order to avoid these problems. However, when you compared the fear-mongering scare tactics of anti-globalization to the improved future for all of globalization, it is obvious which is the better choice.

Lily Bjorlin, Chapter 12, Question 5

The passage in this chapter that stood out to me the most was when Wheelan mentioned possible solutions to US (or any country's) workers losing their jobs to outsourcing. Displaced workers should be offered training for other types of work with that company so they are able to start another job soon without having to head out and search for one. Most of all though our education system should shift to teaching useful skills for a variety of jobs so students (who will shortly become the labor force) will be more adaptable to different types of jobs instead of being confined to one certain type of job. If workers have more versatile skills they will be more prepared for various jobs.

I just happen to be listening to Christmas while writing this (because I listen to nothing else at this time of year) and the song In A Bleak Midwinter started playing. One verse says:

What can I give Him, poor as I am? 
If I were a shepherd, I would bring a lamb; 
If I were a Wise Man, I would do my part; 
Yet what I can I give Him... give my heart.

Get it? Its like how each nation has certain things they are good at making or doing that they can bring to the table for trade. Imagine a developing country is singing this song. They're poor with little goods they are able to bring to the trade table. If they were Canada they could bring maple syrup or if they were Slovakia they could bring sheep but what do they have? Their most important resource is their work force (like we were talking about in class the other day) so that is what they can offer. 

Laura Bartz, Chapter 12, question 5

I found it particularly interesting when Wheelan was talking about how trade helps developing or third world countries. Politicians like to go on and on about how we need to get our industry back and cut off foreign trade. But those are also the same people that talk about how we need to fundraiser money to help those poorer third world countries grow. What they don't seem to realize or what they don't talk about is that to be able to help those third world countries grow, we need to have a lot of foreign trade. It's the idea of give a man to fish and he'll eat for a day, teach a man to fish and he'll eat for a life time. Expect in this case if you give a man to fish it will get caught up in red tape and the man will never get to eat anything. Foreign trade boosts economies and encouraging foreign trade will help to change the climate of how the general public seems to feel about trade.

Nathan Rowley, Chapter 12, Question 6

I was reading the section about trade and pollution, and how London's worst air pollution occurred in the 1890s. The Industrial Revolution was past, the revolutionary becoming the normal. It reminded me of the conditions that industrial workers of the time dealt with: dangerous machinery, long hours, low pay. Rather like a sweatshop. . .

It was then that I realized that there is a pattern to societal progression. After the introduction of industry, societies enter a period of rapid industrial growth at the expense of workers. Eventually, society moves out of this stage into one of gradually greater-skilled workers, until a country reaches what would be considered developed by today's standards. It has been roughly 175 years since the Industrial Revolution. And the thing is, the U.S., Britain, and other similar countries had to do it by themselves. If that took only 175 years, a tiny blip of time, countries that have sweatshops now should reach today's level of development even faster; they don't have to invent all of a developed nation's technology from scratch.

Sweatshops are not only good for the people working in them, comparatively. They are an indicator that rapid development is on the horizon.

Bennett Pope, Chapter 12, Question 5

A passage I found particularly apt to make the argument that trade is good is found on 280. Wheelan is talking about the use of blockades in wartime when he says, "Cutting off trade leaves a country poorer and less productive—which is why we tend to do it to our enemies." This is a fabulous argument in favor of trade because it is recognized very widely that a blockade is a very useful weapon in war. If a lack of trade issn't harmful to to a nation, why would we do it to our opponents in times of war? Another interesting connection I made in this chapter is that Lincoln didn't want to engage in trade with England for the railroad tracks, but Lincoln also played a major factor in deciding to set up the blockade against the south during the Civil War, which contradicts itself. It looks like Honest Abe could have built his railroad more efficiently if he had Naked Economics to help him.

Eleanor Oakman. Chapter 12, Question 2

Wheelan brought up through out the chapter that globalization is good for both poor and rich countries, I agree. Though I still don't understand why anyone wouldn't. Especially about the sweatshops, as Wheelan explained that if all those hippies in the richer countries keep protesting against sweatshop products, the Asian sweatshop workers would "end up in even worse jobs, or on the streets - and that a significant number [would be] forced into prostitution."  I thought to myself that what would happen to the sweatshop-focused countries when they are strong enough for people to not have to work in such cheap conditions, and don't want to make our stuff anymore! I'm not saying we should stop with sweatshops for our own economic future, because I know that we are stil winning economically with the other countries making our stuff for a cheep price. But I am interested to see when or if the time comes when the working countries don't want to work for us anymore because they are finiancially stable enough.

Caroline Paulsen, Chapter 12, Question 5

One passage in Chapter 12 the stuck out to me was about the redistribution of income. Charles Wheelan gave an illustration of angry people carrying pitchforks outside the factory of a successful capitalist and advised the factory owner to "throw these people some food (and maybe some movie tickets and beer) before we all end up worse off". I found this illustration amusing (though accurate), since it reminded me that the concept of the redistribution of wealth/stuff in order to satisfy the people is millennia old. The Latin phrase "panem et circenses" (bread and circuses) came to mind when I read this passage. During the Roman Empire, those in power discovered the need to keep the plebeians satisfied and happy (so that they were able to stay in power). This lead to the distribution of free food and the staging of public entertainment.

Lauren Stevens, Chapter 12, Question 6

The opening of this chapter made me think about something that I have never thought about in such depth before. Wheelan talks about a crazy machine that creates one thing into something else on the completely opposite end of the spectrum. As I was reading this I was thinking "wow that'd be so awesome, but knowing this book, its gonna turn around and be like.. 'OH WAIT!! This already exists!!''' and it did. I've never thought of trade in this way, I've always thought of it as "if I give someone this, they will give me something else in return." Never as an innovator that creates something from nothing.

The other part of the opening to this chapter that made me think about how privileged my life really is, is when he talks about how life would be without trade. Waking up in a shoddy house built with my uncoordinated hands, with clothes also made by my uncoordinated hands, and making my own coffee from scratch. It made me realize how essential trade is to every day life. Myself and many others do not or did not realize this and its very important that more people do.

Jack Bexell, Chapter 13, Question 3

In my book, someone had written this.

Someone had written this into the book for probably a lot of different reasons, but I took it this way: It was to help me with this blog post, and that is what I'm going to use it for. So...

What is the chapter about? It is about the poverty in countries, and what Wheelan thinks we should do about it. He gives examples such as Property Rights, Geography, and Human Capital.

The writing in my book was saying that there is a cycle of poverty in these countries, and explains why. Wealth creates opportunity to learn which creates human talent, but when there is a country with most of the population that is poor, (the writer of these notes called Poor Economics) the economy does not have a solution to mend countries in poverty.

Christen Majors, Chapter 13

Unfortunately poor countries can be "caught in a human capital trap." Skills make an economy sucessful and skilled workers need other skilled workers inorder to be fully sucessful. In a population with few skilled workers they can find they are less productive. Because human capital trumps resources every time and we are unable  to ship huge quantities of human capital to poor countries. I drover to break this cycle or alleviate the cycle trade is very important and a in order for it to be most effective a country needs to have an open economy.

Collis McKenzie, Chapter 13, Question 5

The quote from the Chinese student about corruption was interesting to me. When I was in China the tour guide told us about how before China had the economic reform in the 70s and 80s, the government was so corrupt that nothing could get done efficiently. He told us about how the government took houses from rich people and then gave it to a group of 7-10 families. That gave people a place to live, but it didn't change their conditions. If even after all this time and change China still suffers from government corruption, then it might be impossible to completely get rid of it because it has become a part of the culture.

Adam Hano, Chapter 13, Question 1

Charles Wheelan in chapter 13 explains what polices or factors are common in wealthier nations. An idea that stayed in my mind was the one about corruption. Charles explains that effective government is very important for Economies to grow. He argues that when there is a huge corruption in a country that makes government less efficient then there are many bad results such as: Discouragement of foreign investment, misallocation of resources and decrease in innovation.

I have never thought of corruption in that way. In our country corruption is lots of times seen differently. You meet with corruption almost every day. From trying to bribe a bus ticket inspector, to bribing police officers when they give you a ticket or when you simply want to pass a driving test (people usually give 30 Euros bribes). In many undeveloped countries it is even much worse, but the worst thing is that people perceive corruption as a way to move forward. You are simply more skillful if you can bribe an official. 

Matúš Kočalka, Chapter 13, Question 6

Mr. Wheelan writes about all things that play a significant role when it comes to the economy and wealth of the country. He mentions the important factors such as human capital, geography, openness to trade etc.
The world´s poorest countries are mostly in Africa - partly because of a bad infrastructure, education, location... No one can say that it´s just and only Africa´s fault, that they´re poor. On the other hand, we can say that Slovakia is poor and we´re the only one to blame.
Slovakia has a great position. It´s in the middle of Europe, and that means that we can easily trade with all of the neighbouring countries. This gives us a tremendous opportunity to use it and to drag as much foreign companies (that would give us the work opportunities) as we can. But unfortunately, Slovakia is still stuck in the old mind-set of communism, which almost destroyed the economy of all of the former countries of the Soviet Union. Slovak people trust to the false promises of the famous politicians (raising the retirements, trains for free), and they vote for people that are closely related to the corruption.                                                                                                                                           People in Slovakia caused a significant damage to our country willingly - ten years ago we elected a political party, that privatized huge part of Slovakia, destroyed the national market and at that time, people in Europe perceived us as the "dark hole of Europe" full of suspicious relationships between the politicians and the Mafia. Even though we´re not struggling with most of the things that Wheelan mentioned (we have good education, location etc.), we do not really use it. We keep willingly destroying our country by electing Mafia into the government and therefore sustaining poor. I´m upset.

Marin Chapter 13 Question 6

I remember reading Gun's Germs and Steel for AP World and Jared Dimond came across a man for New Guiana who said "Why do you white men have so much cargo?" Dimond then went on exploring the history of what made our nations evolve to what they are today. He traced back to environment and colonizations. The part in this novel that stood out to me as interesting was when he said corruption can trace all the way back to colonization. This really made me frustrated, because I thought the quote from the Chinese graduate student pleading to know how to get rid of the corruption in China. I was frustrated because I don't think any person should have to feel that way about their life and government and as I kept reading to discover that the corruption is from the economy witch leads back to the patterns of early settlements. Something which this girl in China and other have absolutely no control over, but are forced to live through the consequences now. As I went to read on, I feel like we have the tools to bring about a healthy economy which would lead to less corruption in these nations such as education and human capital. Why can we help educate these countries now to help them create more human capital which would increase their economy, decrease the corruption, and over all help benefit the rest of the world with trade and such. Another countries economy going up only stimulates everyone else economies.

Jack McGillivray, Chapter 13, Question 6

Something that really struck me from this chapter was how the same foreign aid can help some countries so much and others so little. Wheelen proposes that this is due to the ineffectiveness of some governments. He says that poor countries often have bad habits, and these habits are reinforced by any foreign aid they receive. An example that he gives is the countries of East Asia, which have hugely successful economies and effective governments, and the countries of South Asia, Sub-Saharan Africa, and Latin America, which have poor economies and corrupt governments. In the past I had never thought that foreign aid to developing countries may be doing just as much harm as good. And I agree with his solution to make foreign aid merit based, only giving aid to governments that have proved they will use it well. However, as Wheelan mentions, this can leave us in tricky situations. Aid may need to be denied to desperate countries because we know they will use it ineffectually. There is no easy solution to this problem, and it is an issue that will be struggled with for years and years to come.

Lauren Stevens, Chapter 13, Question 6

Something I never fully realized was how much human capital consists of and how much it matters for a country to really be successful. The example that shocked me was when he talked about when there are more educated women there are lower mortality rates in babies. Modern technology in more stable countries then helps out poor countries because it can be shared at almost no cost, which then boosts their productivity making them more stable. Human capital is essential to any countries success and staying successful.

Eleanor Oakman. Chapter 13, Question 6

What I found most interesting and also agreed with, was when Wheelan brought up the differences between open trade countries and self sufficient countries. It is clear that open economies grow much faster than closed. In the American Economist Review they agree as well .  A growth of 0.7 percent per capita compared to 4.5 annual percent is pretty noticeable. Though what got me thinking was why did these select economies close for trade in the first place? Wheelan brought up that many of these countries with closed economies have other problems as well, but why should that be the reason why they are so isolated? Wouldn't trade with other economies influence their neighboring countries to help out and give financial aid to them when in need? Especially if  they  are a trading scource with eachother? That is what confuses me and want to know more about, I may be wrong because I am an average student in life, but it seems to me that being a closed economy just digs a deeper hole for them to manage.

Lily Bjorlin, Chapter 13, Question 5

What struck me most in this chapter was how a fair amount of the determining factors between a wealthy nation and a poverty stricken nation are things that the nation has little to no control over. For example, a wealthy nation has effective government institutions, but the quality of government institutions was linked in the study done by Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, and James Robinson to how that area was originally settled or colonized way back when. Current governments have no control over whether they were an "extractive state" or a hospitable area hundreds of years ago, yet it determines in part what their economy is like today. Also, geography is completely luck of the draw. Countries don't decide "Oh let's have a temperate climate today, but tomorrow I'm thinking to switch it up and be tropical, then the next day we should be a tundra." But only two of the thirty "rich" countries have tropical climates. The temperature and weather just isn't conducive to lots of agriculture and good health. However, I was surprised natural resources didn't have as much of an effect as I thought which is good news for countries who weren't gifted with a natural gas deposit or lots of coal that could be mined.

Ingrid Snook, Chapter 13, Question 2

Throughout this chapter, Wheelan emphasizes the negative long term effects that come with third world countries and the ineffective way richer countries try to improve them. Wheelan breaks down this chapter into about 9 issues that should be focused in on for improving third wheel countries. One that he focused on that shocked me the most was his paragraphs on the equality of women. In many many countries there is still massive gender inequality and it's incredible to see what a difference that could make eliminating that for a third world country. Utilizing every oersons talents and knowledge seems like such a basic thing to improve human capita, but it is obviously lost in a lot of countries. This concept seems like it is one that could be improved and have positive effects in the future, but it will only change if people want the change. Unlike some other issues mentioned in this chapter (war, the discovery and use of natural resources, and geography) that will not always and cannot be prevented, gender equality seems like a change a country could make toward self-sufficiency and improvement.

Laura Bartz, Chapter 13, Question 5

Wheelan was talking about the importance of democracy amd. Working government to help a nation's economy grow. "Famines have never materialized in any country that is independent" having freedom of speech and competition for leadership of the nation, will lead to a better functioning country. If there is no competition allowed or criticism of the nation could lead to inprisonment or death, then the country cannot develop and work more efficiently for the whole and the quality of life will atrophy with it.

Nathan Rowley, Chapter 13, Question 5

There are many moral and political arguments one can make for giving women equal rights, and just as many against it. I was surprised to learn that there is an argument with implications that are a bit more concrete. On page 311, Charles Wheelan talks about the Arab Human Development Report and its conclusions, one of which was that "women's status" was a key factor slowing economic growth. The idea makes intuitive sense; the farming analogy that Wheelan makes demonstrates it quite nicely. But for the Arab region, which has so few, if any, rights for women, the idea becomes revolutionary. Finally, we can make an argument that isn't based on a normative judgement: if you want your lives to improve at any appreciable rate, give women equal rights.

I was not surprised to read that the women used money more sensibly than the men did.

Bennett Pope, Chapter 13, Question 3

Disease is an enormous problem in the developing world. Millions of people are killed by diseases leaving orphaned children and widows with even less than they had before. It seems as though modern medicine should be able to put an end to this, but it doesn't. Wheelan says in chapter 13 that the cause of this, essentially, greed. Creating new treatments for diseases can be incredibly profitable if people are willing and able to pay for them. The problem is, those willing and able to pay for them are not, typically, in the developing world. As a result, the vaccinations needed in the developing world are not created because it is difficult to make money that way. The solution Wheelan gives for this is to have governments give monetary incentives to create these vaccinations and treatments. People respond to money, and will be much more likely to research new possibilities for treatment if incentivized. By making people more healthy, they have more time to become more productive, and that will result in growth.

Caroline Paulsen, Chapter 13, Question 5

I have known for a while that corruption is a very significant force in less developed countries (and still a force in developed ones as well)— when I was in Kenya in 6th grade, I noticed that in general, people who had authority (including in the government) tended to abuse that authority. There was a lot of tribe-based favoritism, and people would often try to make things more difficult for people from tribes that were historically enemies with their own. Also, I heard many stories about the Kenyan police, who were generally acknowledged as being corrupt. This corruption made many things much more difficult and inefficient.

Nevertheless, one of the passages from chapter 13 that shocked me the most was about the Peruvian economist, Hernando de Soto, who tried to set up a one-person clothing stall without bribing anyone. He was doing this to determine how much it would take (and whether or not it was possible) to actually comply with the unreasonable and excessive laws that were in place and still succeed. After working 6 hours per day for 42 weeks with his team, they were able to open a small, one-person shop for a total of $1,231 (which is 31 times Peru's monthly minimum wage). Along the way, people asked for bribes 10 times and they had to pay the bribes twice. This both horrified and fascinated me because it made me realize how impossible it would be for an average citizen in less developed countries to do a seemingly straightforward task, like opening a small business, without paying bribes.

Jack Bexell, Chapter 11, Question 5

"At the other end of the political spectrum, the antiglobalzation coalition access the World Bank and IMF of acting as capitalist lackeys forcing globalization on the developing world and leaving poor countries saddled with large debts in the process. The organizations' meetings have become an occasion for violent protest."

Because of the big companies, the worlds progress in total is staggered. Countries who are already behind in development are left further behind due to their large debts. This stuck out to me because it confused me why this is even a cycle. Shouldn't there be a system that when a country is developing behind the rest of the world, there is a force pushing it back to the line of the norm, instead of leaving in behind? Humanities need for competition does not help in most cases of inequality. For example, when a child wants to play with a certain toy, and another child sees that child's wanting for that activity, the other one competes for that toy and leaves the other child with nothing. Same is this system of the development. When the big coalitions force the globalization, the rest of the developing world gets stuck in the hole of debt.

Jack McGillivray, Chapter 11, question 5

Something I found extremely interesting from the chapter was the fact that growth is good for everyone. In almost every other circumstance if someone else or your opponent is doing better than you are its a bad thing. However in economics there are no real opponents. If one nation's economy is doing much better than another's it does not hinder the anyone, but instead provides benefits to both of the nations. This can be a difficult concept to understand because of our preconceived notions of competition and what it entails. But global economics is not a zero sum game, one nation doing well will lead to others doing well.

Jacky Xu,Chapter 11,question 5

"Of course ,"all else equal"is a phrase that never actually applies to the global economy."
The exchange rate is changing all the time p,and no one can really predict what will happen in the future,so no one can really predict what will happen to a country's currency.Just like Chinese is developing so fast that people even thinking that Chinese yuan will take place US dollar one day.however dollar is still pretty stable right now,and the US bond is one of the safest bond in the world.

Matúš Kočalka, Chapter 11, Question 1

In this Chapter Mr. Wheelan says that: "A change in the exchange rate makes foreign goods cheaper or more expensive, depending on the direction of the change."
In order to support his argument, he gives us some examples. I remember one with the accomodation in Paris. One American was complaining that the hotel changed their prices, because it cost him more than what was written in their official price list. The hotel manager calmly replied that they didn´t charge him more - and the truth was on his side. Since the USD currently worth less comparing to the Euro, the price of the accomodation in the hotel havent´t changed. Americans pay more, because they have to exchange more of their dollars for less of our Euros, and therefore, for the Americans, the price for the hotel accomodation isn´t the same as the one that´s in the price list. Euro rules!
I remember travelling to Romania. Since they still don´t have the Euro, but their national currency is Lei, we had to exchange our currency for theirs. And once we came to Romania, everything was much cheaper. For example we stopped in one restaurant, and they charged us for the full menu/ person altogether 6 Euros. Comparing to Slovakia, it´s nothing. It was a pretty solid restaurant, and I guarantee that in Slovakia it would cost you more than 15 Euros. In Europe, when a person travells to the East, the prices change and are totally different from the prices in the West. Romania, comparing to the France or Britain is a price heaven.
Mr. Wheelan also says that if everyone knew that, and started buying goods/ services in Romania, they currency would raise. But it still didn´t happen there:)

Christen Majors, Chapter 11

Similar to my last post for chapter 10, what stood out to me in Chapter 11 was the idea of paper money as a medium of exchange. The American dollar like every other well known currency is not backed by gold, or camels, or paper clips making its value in trade just as a medium of exchange.

Adam Hano, chapter 11, question 1

In Chapter 11 Charles Wheelan explains currency change. Since I am now here in the US the exchange rates affect me a lot. When my brother was here five years ago the exchange rate was much better for Euro. For 1 Euro you could get 1.4 dollars. Now it is around only 1.1. The cost of me traveling here therefore is higher by more than 30 percent.

Furthermore, Charles explains the cost of single currency such as Euro. He explains that by having Euro countries lost their power to control monetary policy. They simply are going with the flow that might not reflect their economy. This affects everyone in the Euro zone, because we have to bear the cost of Greece and other countries, for which the Euro is simply to expansive. 

Bennett Pope, Chapter 11, question 6

In this chapter I learned a lot about the connections between the currencies of different nations around the world, but I was left wondering to what extent different countries affect others. For example, the world is going to notice a much larger difference if the U.S Dollar changes in value than the Guatemalan Quetzal. I would be interested to know what countries have the greatest impact and how much of an impact they have. The world impact of the Great Recession has been talked about, but what about on a smaller scale? Does the world primarily worry about the US? China? The Middle East? I am curious to know more.

Eleanor Oakman, Chapter 11. Question 6

What I found most interesting or wanted to learn more about was the failings of certain currencies around the world. Though I still don't really know what "pegged" exchange rates are when Wheelan tries to explain them to the readers, I am starting to grasp the significance of the different currencies. For example, today in Greece. For Greece, they are on the brink of changing their currency mainly because they are having such a hard time trading and connecting with other countries, and also they are in a severe depression. Reading about when currencies fail on page 256 I thought about the speculators (who they specifically are I still don't understand) and how they are able to make millions off of the countries economic failure. Because of their dept and weak economic structure does that mean when a country leads to failure the currency goes first since it's the physical object that is being traded with other countries? I hope you (Hoffner) can bring this up in class on Tuesday so the class can discuss what "pegged" exchange rates are, and how exactly these speculators are making money when the currencies change.

Laura Bartz, Chater 11, Question 5

The idea of a gold standard seems fairly straightforward and it makes your currency sound super cool. Finding out exchange rates is much more simplified since all you have to find out is how much of your currency does it take to buy an ounce of gold and the same for the country's currency that you are trying to convert to and then the math is very straightforward. But Wheelan easily points out the massive problem with currency being backed by gold. When the value of the currency starts depreciating at a concerning rate, people immediately demand that the notes that they hold be exchanged for gold. This will then lessen the demand further for the currency and make it depreciate further which turns into a viscous cycle until the currency is worth nothing.

Caroline Paulsen, Chapter 11, Question 5

One passage that I found particularly interesting in this chapter was titled "funny money", which addresses currencies that don't have value internationally. In this section, Charles Wheelan gives an example of one particular "soft" currency, the East German mark, which only had purchasing power in the communist world. Charles Wheelan had to exchange "hard currency" for East German marks at a seemingly arbitrary exchange rate at a checkpoint to enter East Germany. When leaving East Berlin, the remainder of his East German marks were purportedly put on an account under his name, which may still exist, even though the currency is now useless. This part of chapter 5 was especially memorable because it emphasizes the fact that currency is only worth something because we've decided that it's worth something.

Chapter 11: Question 6, Marin Fredrickson

My biggest takeaway from this chapter, or at least what made the most significant impression on me was I need Soros to manage my finances. When I first read that he made one billion dollars in one night, it sounded impressive, but I really wasn't impressed until I read on and learned how smooth he was in treating something like currency almost as object. How he was able to predict that the pound was going to go down and how he could work the system and how smooth he was with the stocks and bonds. This chapter helped me understand it a little more, but rather than feeling confident about knowing how money in the world I feel less confident than I was before because I knew less before. I didn't think it was this complex! I have never heard of a PPP or how International currencies have such a domino effect. This is why I need a Soros in my life.

Chapter 11, Question 5, Lauren Stevens

Something that I found interesting was the way that The Economist used Big Macs to explain the difference in the worth of currency around the world. It helped me understand it more, because almost every place has a McDonalds with Big Macs, and they're worth more or less depending on how much their currency is worth compared the the U.S. dollar. This comparison will ultimately help me remember how the difference effects exchange between countries, even though the example is using a below average fast food item.

Nathan Rowley, Chapter 11, Question 6

I was surprised to learn that the U.S. debt is as much a problem for its creditors, like China, as for itself. As dangerous as it is for the U.S. to be in such debt, default or inflationary tactics for getting rid of the debt are just as dangerous for China, because it will lose all of the money it has loaned. It makes sense, however, that the situation will eventually have to resolve, as Charles Wheelan says.

In biology, the only symbiotic relationship that is harmful to both species involved is competition. It is that same competition that serves as a primary driver of evolution. The same principles are present in economics, from the level of individuals all the way up to countries. Competition is how economies evolve, but it can be a destructive process for both.

Jack Bexell, Chapter 10, Question 6

"The phrase 'somewhere in the range' gives you the first inkling of how hard the Fed's job is. The Federal Reserve must strike a delicate balance. If the economy grows more slowly than it is capable of, then we are wasting economic potential."

The federal reserve shows that the slower the economy grows the more waste in efficiency that we have. What can we do to make things more efficient? More people with more skills could really make the economy boost. 

Also I have a question. Do chain restaurants hurt the economy? specifically Starbucks?(unrelated)

I'm sorry that I didnt post earlier.

Collis Mckenzie, chapter 10, question 5

What stuck out to me from the chapter was section on governments taxing their citizens indirectly by printing more money to pay government employees. The government has more money that is worth less than before, but overall the government has more purchasing power than before. It's interesting to think that when money has no intrinsic value, it is easy to change how much it is worth. The value of the dollar is equal to the value of the dollar and nothing more, so the value of a dollar changing is necessarily always a bad thing.

Jacky Xu,Chapter 10 question6

"Inflation is bad;deflation,or steadily falling prices,is much worse "when the price keep falling down,everyone expect that the price will go lower.and this will cause that people keep their money instead of spending then.(just like you know the Black Friday discount,why would you spend the money before that).And people stop using their money which break the market,because there is no exchange.When the demand goes down,same as supply,and company start to shut down,and the economy of the country is in danger

Christen Majors, Chapter 10, question

Money serves as a mean of exchange and wealth is measured by the accumulation of of all things that have value. Money is used during trade and commerce. Before paper money was used as a medium of exchange humans used material objects such as bottles and pans and necklaces. They used these things because they were confident that they could trade these things and get something in return of equal value. We now use paper money for the same reason because we it has become a mean of exchange that we are confident will be able to be used to by what we need. Now that I think about it what will we be using as a medium of exchange in 2027?

Matúš Kočalka, Chapter 10, Question 5

Mr. Wheelan describes why people believe that money worth something: “And people peddling real things will accept dollars because they are confident that other people peddling other real things will accept them.”                                                                                                                                    When I stop and think about it, I still cannot really believe that the entire humankind is partially based on our imagination. The world works, because we set the strict rules, and one of these rules is that money actually worth something. We are so confident in our belief that the money have a certain price, but in the reality, it´s just a piece of paper. When I realize that money aren´t backed up by anything else (e.g. gold, silver), than just by our faith, it´s making me confused – how can we be so certain, that this idea will work also in future? That there won´t be some sudden crash, which will destroy all of our worldwide markets?                                                                                                  Our entire world is based on a piece of paper. 

Lily Bjorlin, Chapter 10, Question 5

I have never fully understood inflation. How can something that has a set value suddenly just not be worth that same amount? When Wheelan explained how the dollar is actually worth nothing and it's just the value we give it and the "purchasing power" we put into a piece of paper (well it's mostly cotton but whatever). Inflation means we start believing that piece of paper has less value than before, despite the paper not changing at all. This made the whole concept so much clearer to me.

Adam Hano, Chapter 10, Question 1

In chapter 10 Charles Wheelan explains how the inflation works. Many of those examples were really scary, because you realize that your money (your wealth) depends on the trust of people, and the magic hand of the Fed. What is even more scary for me is the fact that if I earn 10 $ today in 10 years the value could be only 5$.

The sentence that struck me the most was, when he linked bad economics to WWII. When I read it I realized that Economics aren’t simply a tool to make us better off, but that economics can be used as a weapon in war. This is possible because of the huge impact of Economics in our lives as for example inflation in post WWII Germany. 

Caroline Paulsen, Chapter 10, Question

Before reading this chapter, I have to admit that I had taken the Federal Reserve for granted. I knew that it has a significant part in controlling the economy, but I hadn't realized just how difficult it is to predict economic trends. The part of this chapter that was most interesting to me was where Charles Wheelan listed all of the factors that make it difficult to implement a good rate of economic growth: we don't know the economy's "speed limit", any policies implemented will have delayed effects, the Fed is not the sole controller of the economic growth rate, and unforeseen world events can mess up the economy. This made me realize just how difficult and unpredictable it is to try to control and guide economic growth.

Jack McGillivray, Chapter 10, Question 6

Until reading this chapter I had known that the Fed controlled interest rates, but I had no clue how they did that or what interest rates they controlled. Previously when I heard the fed changed interest rates i assumed it was on anything with interest, however once i realized that there are thousands of different interest rates on thousands of investments and loans, Federal reserve interest rates really confused me. Now that i know that fed interest rate changes are just manipulation of bond currency exchange the concept makes much more sense to me. Its also really interesting the amount of calculation and guesswork involved in the process. Knowing how uncertain the process is also helps me to understand why during the latest recession there were so many ideas proposed, and why there were so many beliefs about what the effect of each of these ideas would be.

Ingrid Snook, Chapter 10, Question 5

What really stuck out to me during this chapter was when Wheelan is talking about India. He made it sound like the whole concept of our currency, and the a lot of the worlds, is all psychological. Knowing that our currency isn't actually worth anything, we're just putting a mental value on it is almost disturbing. What if one day we all refused to pay with money and decided to pay with talents or riddles or facts instead? Who would be the rich people? It just makes me wonder how the people of our country often don't agree on a a lot of things, but for some reason we can all agree that our hard earned dollar is worth something being sold to us. It's not bad necessarily, it's just kind of weird.

Eleanor Oakman, Chapter 10. Question 6

What I found really interesting in chapter 10 was when Wheelan brought up  the descriptions of what money is supposed to be. One of the reasons why I enjoyed reading this so much was because we discussed the topic of money in class on Tuesday. What I think is a good idea is for our money to be laminated with plastic, it is in decent shape compared to what money used to be. As in heavy or inconsistent or to big or to small. Like gold coins or whale teeth! Our money now is light, thin, and consistently used. What would make our money amazing would be if it were more durable, also known as laminated! In Canada, their money is plastic and I bet it doesn't rip or dissolve or shred as easily as our  thin paper money. Yet another idea for  the u.s to consider.

Bennett Pope, Chapter 10, Question 6

I did not previously understand how narrow a margin the Federal Reserve has in getting the money supply right. The factors they have to take into account are incredible, and the time it takes to see the effects of their policy makes it even harder. If they make interest rates too low, we get too much inflation, and if they err too high, there is deflation. It makes me think of playing a video game where your character lags and you have to wildly predict the future. It causes me to respect those who are smart enough to get these rates even near where they should be, and it causes me to be more sympathetic towards those who miss the mark.

Nathan Rowley, Chapter 10, Question 5

I found page 241 of chapter ten to be the most interesting. On that page, Charles Wheelan describes how "the Fed started to do things that one recent economic paper described as 'not in the current textbook descriptions of monetary policy,'" in response to the 2007 financial crisis. He shortly follows with the statement "Ben Bernanke and crew pulled out the monetary equivalent of duct tape." As our economies grow larger and more complex, governments will have to find novel ways of managing economic trends and mitigating crises, as the Fed had to do in 2007.

The physical sciences have developed beyond their basic stages, and consequently produced engineering jobs applying scientific knowledge. Economics, in its current form, is still in a basic stage. Perhaps we will see job openings for economic engineering in the future.

Laura Bartz, Chapter 10, Question 6

When I was younger I always thought that America would never have money problems because they could just print more money. I mean it makes sense more notes means more money, end of problem. But one very important criteria for money to work is that it has to be scarce. the more money there is floating around, the less value it has and therefore the less useful it is for solving the problem. So my question is, if we find that inflation is increasing too quickly, when money goes through banks to the federal reserve can and do they just pull notes and not let as many go back out?

Christen Majors, Chaoter 9, Question 6

Although the chapter was primarily on GDP increase and decrease and its effect on a nation, the passage I found most interesting was on material progress and the things we take for granted. Wheelan asks us to consider cellphones and how not to long ago it was "impressive" to be seen with one. "Back then a cell phone cost about 456 hours of work for an average american" while today everyone basically has a cell phone in their hand. "Now (it) costs about nine hours of work." This is seen as a rapidly increasing standard of living and most of us take that for granted when we shouldn't because a rapid increase is not normal for the majority of things in today's society or even throughout history.

Chapter 9 , Question 6

I was drawn to reading about the recession in 2007 because I faintly remember my parents talking about it and worried about it and beaming more cautions. I think why this passage really grabbed my attention was because everyone's spending affects everyone. What you buy for lunch, if you decide to buy or sell your house. Everything. I mean before I knew money circulated and such, but I didn't really connect it all together. The line also, "if we all believe that the economy will get worse, then it will get worse. And if we all believe it will get better, then it will get better." I think this demonstraightss how much the economy is a system where we all act out of our own self interest, when really it is all of us that determin how it is and all of us and our spending or saving that affect it.

Adam Hano, Chapter 9, Question 1

In chapter 9 Charles Wheelan explains how we measure the growth of our economy. He questions whether GDP is the right and most accurate measurement we can have. He then gives other potential better types how to measure our economies. For me, the most questionable thing is that if we don’t have a precise type of measurement, why does it than matter so much. There are agencies such as Moody’s or S&P that give ratings to countries based on their GDPs and other factors. Based on those ratings, country gets their interest rates, when they borrow money. However, if those measurements aren’t 100 % correctly talking about economies than the ratings aren’t too. Therefore the interest rates aren’t rightly evaluating the economy, which in the end affects me, because I have to pay more or less in my taxes. 

Collis Mckenzie, Chapter 9, Question #6

I learned about another way that politicians could potentially use  specific word play to lie without technically lying.  The  idea of GDP versus real GDP is an important distinction to make.  If the nominal GDP increased by 40%, but inflation also increases by 40% then there really isn't any change., but politicians could say that there was massive GDP growth  and be misleading but not technically  lying. It's just more another outlet to mislead people who don't know much about economics. It reinforced  the idea for me that  politics is full of buzzwords that people don't understand.

Jack McGillivray, Chapter 9, Question 6

One analogy Wheelan made that I quite liked was contrasting the global economy to sports. In playing a sport one stands to benefit off an opponent's disadvantage or loss. However in the global economy it is advantageous to all for everyone to be doing as well as possible. This is a concept that many people, including myself, don't realize. It is easy to think that if China's manufacturing industry tanks, it will benefit America by providing more manufacturing jobs. however the opposite is true. Because there will be less people able to afford what we produce, American manufacturing will decline as a result. It is somewhat startling to me to think that basic tenets of economics, such as this,  are so widely unknown.

Lily Bjorlin, Chapter 9, Question 5

What struck me the most in this chapter was when Wheelan was talking about the other ways to measure economic success. When he mentioned that our poverty rate is roughly the same as it was in the '70s, I couldn't believe it. You would think with all of our technological advancements and human rights campaigns in the past 45 years we would at least have made a dent in the poverty rate. It made me think of when we were taking in class the other day about how we help the poor. I think that if we had more programs (efficient and inexpensive programs that is) it would greatly help our nations poor.

Caroline Paulsen, Chapter 9, Question 6

In chapter 9, Charles Wheelan points out the deficiencies in using GDP alone to measure the economies/prosperity/happiness of countries. Although I had known that GDP was an insufficient measurement, I hadn't previously known how insufficient it is and how many different approaches there are to help measure particular parts of economies and determine economic prosperity.  I found it fascinating how people are trying to come up with new methods measuring these things, such as with a Green GDP (to subtract environmental damage that can appear to help short-term economic growth) or a Human Development Index (to measure other aspects of economic health such as GDP, life expectancy, literacy, education, etc.). I also thought that it was amusing how people are even trying to figure out new ways to calculate national happiness.

Yaphet chapter 9 q#5

"Making money takes time, so when we shop, we're really spending time. The real cost of living isn't measured in dollars and cents but in the hours and minutes we must work to live." This passage struck me as interesting because I never put it that way. Every time I work I never think about giving up time from my life for money. So every time I make a purchase, it's not only paid with money but also my life. It's almost a little scary how we give time from our life for money.

Eleanor Oakman. Chapter 9, Question 1

At the end of chapter 9 Wheelan brought up how u.s citizens save their money for future goals, an example  would be college. This made me think of what happened to me this weekend!

Every year I play club volleyball and since college is coming next year, the savings is getting stricter. My family and I realized that we wouldn't be able to afford for me to play club this year. (due to saving for college), I was completely devastated, it made perfect sense and the logical thing for us to do was cut off sports. Then we contacted the club director and made an agreement saying that I would clean the bathrooms and run the consession stand in order to make up for the money at the club that we can't spend. Now this isn't what I expected to be doing this year, but because of how we HAVE to save for college, I am happy to do it in order for me to play volleyball.

Laura Bartz, Chapter 9, Question 5

China's ever growing economy is something that is always talked about with envy. But something that is often forgotten (including myself), is their horribly polluted environment. China being seen as this untouchable economic power house, is actually a pretty misconstrued idea if you look at the state of their air, the lack of nature, and the negative externalities that are left in the publics health. I find it so interesting that Wheelan mentioned that while on paper their GDP growth is at 10%, but once their pollution costs are factored in it drops to 7%. Maybe their economic untouchability isn't so enviable after all.

Bennett Pope, Chapter 9, question 3

In chapter 9, Wheelan talked about one of the causes of recessions, and the remedy he suggested was interesting, but ultimately impractical. On page 202, Wheelan describes how people spend less when they are under pressure financially. This is common sense because we have less to spend. However, Wheelan says that by saving more money, we actually increase the problem. By not spending money on the things I would have before, bussinesses have to lay people off to maintain costs. This person who was just layed off will, in turn, not spend money on other bussinesses, and the whole economy goes into a downward spiral. Wheelan says that if people would keep spending, then we would be better off, but he also recognizes that this method is incredibly impractical. When people have less to spend, they aren't going to want to spend it. Even if everybody chose to keep their spending up, we could still easily run out of funds quickly. Wheelan himself describes the situation as a paradox. While it may work if everybody pitched in, I do not foresee a situation in which everybody actually would.

Nathan Rowley, Chapter 9, Question 6

I had known we were in an economic recession in 2007 before reading chapter nine. What I didn't know was just how serious it was, and how much of an impact it probably has on my life. To think that we very easily could have had a second Great Depression is scary. It was thanks to our knowledge of history that we avoided the mistakes that would have set us on that path again. And that got me thinking on how much we actually know about economics.

Part of the reason why I have found economics so fascinating since beginning this course is that it is a relatively new field in its current form; the large-scale economies that create the business cycle and other global effects are only a couple centuries old, hardly a blip even on the time scale of human existence. We have had so very little time to adapt and learn about how to manage such large entities, and in the process we've made mistakes; the Great Depression is the first to come to mind. But it is a testament to how much we have learned that we avoided the same mistakes in the 2007 housing crisis. And the paradigm shift from rational self-interest to behavioral economics is a testament to how much we still have to learn. I am attracted to fields likes economics precisely because they haven't been around very long, because there is still a large body of unknowns to discover. It makes me excited, that there are so many things that we have yet to learn.

Lily Bjorlin, Chapter 6, Question 4

Lots of people think that technology is taking jobs from humans. Yes this is true but a fair amount of those jobs being replaced by technology are jobs most people don't want to do anyway or jobs people consider beneath them. As our productivity increases our need for cashiers and people in fast food restaurants will decrease. It's just like in the movie charlie and the chocolTe factory when Charlie's dad loses his job to the toothpaste cap twister machine but then gets another job by being the guy who fixes that machine when it isn't working.

Jack Bexell, Chapter 6, Question 5

"Excellent trial lawyers are scarce; burger flippers are not. ... True, people are poor in America because they cannot find good jobs. But that is the symptom, not the illness. The underlying problem is a lack of skills, or human capital. The poverty rate for high school dropouts in America is 12 times the poverty rate for college graduates."(Wheelan 129)

This stuck out to me because it shows that the reason that poverty is so high is that there is a lack in education. Later on the page Wheelan talks about the poverty rate in India and compares it to the high illiteracy rate. The reason why people can not get jobs is because people are not educated and trained to be out in the real world. This is more of a problem when people are stuck in impoverished areas, without an education system. With little to no help with a chance to break the cycle, there will be no chance to decrease poverty throughout the world. Another problem with stigma is that if a child of an impoverished family realizes their tough "predetermined" predicaments, they might decide that there is no way out of it. Follow the leader in a horrifying example caused by human capital.

Jacky Xu Chapter 6 Question 1

This issue affect my daily life.Human capital generally means how much do you worth.In the book,the writer talks about that many individual will find a job,and some highly educational people will start their own company.This remind me the importance of learning new things,acknowledge myself,to improve my value to make more.

Jack McGillivray, Chapter 6, Question 1

One of the ways in which this chapter relates to my life is the conversations I've had with my coworkers at Walgreens. At the store I worked at, the majority of my coworkers were much older than me, many of them were into their 50's and 60's. Through talking to them I learned that only one of them had gone to college, and many hadn't finished high school. Many of them had been laid off from a previous job and were only able to find work at minimum wage. They were extremely limited by their lack of human capital and because of this were unable to find work for a decent wage. This really stressed the importance of education to me, many of these people were friendly, bright, and compassionate. But no matter how good of a person they are they're limited by their education.

Adam Hano, Chapter 6, Question 1

In Chapter 6 Charles Wheelan explains how does productivity affect your Human Capital and what is it’s outcome to wealth of our Society. The Numbers were stunning. Each year we are 2% wealthier. I have never realized that this wealth is because of our increase in productivity. He also argued that there is no fix amount of job do be done, but that we still create new professions. He gave an example of farm town and explained how it grows.

As a Slovakian I am really ashamed of my country now. Charles explains how Americans are productive. I do agree with it. The productivity factor is deep in your culture and mentality. Slovaks are lazy. We can see that in the services we offer. Slovaks don’t value the customer rather than their own well-being at that moment. It is on daily biases that you argue with either a lady behind the counter on train station, waitress in restaurant or teachers in school. I hope It won’t take us long to realize how important productivity is to the growth of our small nation. 

Matúš Kočalka, Chapter 6, Question 5

Mr. Wheelan gives us an example with 100 000 student dropouts and 100 000 educated students. Both groups are transported into the same big city - Chicago. In the first case, after these dropouts came, it would cause a chaos, because there wouldn´t be enough work and the officials of the city of Chicago would either try to get rid of them, or to get some financial support that would provide the work opportunities for them. In the second case, educated students would be successful in finding the jobs, creating new companies and it wouldn´t be disaster (as it was in the first case). 

This brings me into the confusion. I understand that the human capital is nowadays highly demanded and that there´re benefits coming out of employing the educated people, but on the other hand - where´s the limit? The author states that: "the more productive we are, the richer we are." But if the wealth comes hand in hand with the education, then what if everyone starts to go to the university? 

My example is taken from Slovakia, but I´m sure that it´s happening in the other parts of the world as well. Young people in our country are attending universities/ colleges, because they want to graduate and to have a title in front of their names - since it means to have a better future. The social structure therefore changed. As opposed of the past, when we had a lot of people having just the high school education, nowadays almost everyone gets the university degree. But this means that we´ve thousands of educated people, who want to get the job - and do we have enough job opportunities? No. It´s sad, but young people in Slovakia have trouble to find a job, and they many times have to lower their skills and take the inferior work, or they´re unlucky and they don´t manage to get any job. If the market is overflowed by the university graduates and the education loses its worth. 

Lauren Stevens, Chapter 6, Question 1

An example that relates to my life is when he talks about productivity making us richer. This applied to my life during the "back to school" season at American Eagle. In order to meet our goals for the amount of denim or sweaters we sold there was a "BTS contest." How it worked is while you're working, if you do an exceptional job, you name gets put in the drawing for the day. For example, for every 5 rewards cards the cashier got, that equalled the name being put in the drawing once. In my case, my manager always had me filling clothes where we had already sold them. Every cart full I got put on the floor, I got my name put in once. Therefore the more productive I was the "richer" I was.

Collis McKenzie, Chapter 6, Question #6

One of the things that I got a broadened view of was the place of menial jobs in a society of overqualified people. If everyone is smart enough to be a doctor, who is going to drive the garbage truck? The solution is simple, but makes complete sense. Whoever sees the newly highly demanded job as worth more than his/her current job or someone with no work experience would sit behind the wheel. The importance of low-level jobs is often undervalued because a lot of times people don't think about the experience that is gained from a part-time job in addition to the money. Not many people step in and get a CEO job right out of highschool. Low-level employment is where people skills and responsibility are learned and strengthened.

Chapter 6 Question 6

          When reading this chapter on thing that came to my mind, which seemed kind of dark at first and I felt bad for thinking about it, but this chapter really reminded me of Darwin's "Only the fittest survive." This may be true in the animal kingdom, and it seems to apply to our society today. While reading this it opened my mind that sometimes its not always about not having the resources available, but not having the attitude or drive instead. Kids now days who do have access to a public education still may drop out. This could be because  a multitude of different things, but a lot of time it can we drive or willing to learn because they may not have a strong work ethic. This Wheelman talked about in the chapter, how people are born with certain qualities that set them up for success. Even though this sounds harsh and hopeless, I do think that this is true. However, that doesn't mean successful people should leave to unsuccessful out to dry, if we can somehow then have people to help teach others these ways to success. Making public education more available does help to a certain degree, but what about counselors or career counselors   These people can connect and help someone in a more personal way that will help set up others for success.

Eleanor Oakman. Chapter 6, Question 6

Reading chapter six I was especially intrigued by what Wheelen said about how Americas economy is become more and more unequal.  One of the main points so many people came over seas to the new land (USA), was because of the economic opportunity and the equal potential everyone had regardless of their economic status. Now today "the rich get richer and the poor run in place, or get even poorer." The worse thing is, this is very true, there are everyday examples people see that support this statement. Like how high school dropouts who couldn't afford the tuition are getting paid less than their fellow coworkers who had graduated. I don't like this but in a way it makes sense. If you were to pick one of two job applicants for a position, you would go for the high school graduate rather than the dropout, because they seem more qualified. But what is so sad about the unequal opportunities is that, what if the high school dropout has better work ethic than the graduate, or turns out the graduate is an all around idiot!!

Caroline Paulsen, Chapter 6, Question 1

In Chapter 6, Charles Wheelan points out the primary purpose of education— to gain skills that make you a valuable piece of human capital. For the past couple years, I have been trying to figure out how to structure my schedule so that I can do just that. From elementary school to my sophomore year of high school, my theory was usually "homework first"— in my case, this often meant getting homework done before practicing cello. However, sometime around the end of sophomore year or the beginning of junior year, I became certain that I wanted to major in music (or attend a conservatory) and become a professional musician. This decision made me rethink for the first time how I should prioritize my time to gain the skills that I need. I realized that to get into college and be a musician, having plenty of time to practice is more important than completing homework first. I ended up learning to schedule practice time and do homework around it so that the skills that I need the most became a priority.

Ingrid Snook, Chapter 6, Q. 6

This chapter has definitely showed me that we aren't going to run out of jobs anytime soon. It's opened my eyes to how the U.S. could really benefit from bettering and educating the population as a whole instead of the theory of taxing the rich and giving to the poor. That might work in the short term, but what would be beneficial for years to come would be improving the lives of individuals by educating them to be more productive. I also thought it was interesting how Wheelan said that envy plays a part in people's economic choices. Why would someone choose $100,000 just because that was the circumstance where their peers had less when they had the opportunity to have $110,00? This chapter also had me asking one question in my head the whole time: why don't we put more into improving public education or try to make college education cheaper if it's really going to benefit society that much?

Bennett Pope, Chapter 6, question 5

A passage that I found interesting in chapter 6 was Wheelan's paraphrase, "500 million minds are a terrible thing to waste." In this chapter about productivity and human capital, I thought this quote encompasses both ideas very well. Productivity is as much about how much we waste as it is the amount we create. It doesn't matter how many millions or billions of people we have, the addition of 500 million educated minds will help us become more productive. This all hinges, however, on the human capital that these people provide. They are "wasted" because they have low human capital. By investing in their education, we do not waste their minds, which, as the quote says, is a tragedy.

Nathan Rowley, Chapter 6, Question 5

Although chapter six speaks a lot about poverty, Charles Wheelan ends the chapter on an uplifting note. After posing a series of three pessimistic questions about poverty asking whether poverty is inevitable, Wheelan promptly answers them, "No, no, and no." The reason that poverty must not necessarily exist in an unequal market economy is because economic growth is not a zero-sum game; as the economy continues to grow, everyone will gradually gain greater and greater wealth, even if they may not gain wealth relative to others. Wheelan even posits that it is possible to end poverty in our current economy. He says that families "are not poor because Bill Gates lives in a big house. They are poor despite the fact that Bill Gates lives in a big house." We have reached a point where there is enough wealth for everyone to live comfortably, as Wheelan implies. That there are still people in poverty is not a fault of there not being enough wealth, nor is it because wealth is being withheld from them. It is because of the way our society functions that can prevent people in poverty from getting what they need to improve their lives.

Laura Bartz, Chapter 6, Question 1

In chapter 6, Wheelan talks about human capital. He talks about the reason why a lot of people are wealthy is because they have good human capital. Some people who have strong human capital have it because ether are naturally good at something, like Michael Jordan, others have invested in their human capital to be able to learn skills that will increase their capital. So when people start asking the question of is college actually worth it, there will be a lot of different answers. Wheelan would say that yes in fact college is worth the investment because you are investing in your human capital. Now Wheelan would not suggest that you go to Sarah Lawrence college as he previously talked about in the book, that the student is more telling of success than the college, but college is worth it, to increase your human capital.

Christen Majors, Chapter 8, Question 2

Wheelan mentions the certification process that some teachers have to go through in order to teach. In the end However, regardless of weather or not a teacher is certified or not. The test scores show no preference as to if the certified teacher is more equipped than the non certified teacher. As for the future this certification process keeps well equipped teachers from teaching. Although the public school system reforms there is no effect on the students or the teachers ability.

Nathan Rowley, Chapter 8, Question 5

The passages that most interested me in chapter eight were the ones dealing with interest groups. I was initially surprised when I learned that a smaller group is often a more effective one in our political system. It seemed counter-intuitive at first, but when I began looking at the details, the logic became clear (seemingly a common characteristic of sciences: superficially confusing but internally logical). The idea that a small group is better than a large group flies in the face of the way our government is supposed to work: the majority is supposed to make the rules. However, the opposite is often the case, at least when dealing with a large, unorganized group like the general public. This is because the small group can effectively push for its agenda, while the large group is too unorganized to oppose it, even if that agenda is a net burden on the economy. In addition, the cost of meeting the small group's requests is spread out across the general public, so we barely notice it.

Lily Bjorlin, Chapter 8, Question 1

The main issue in this chapter that applies to my life is the teacher certification situation. The vast majority of people in my family are teachers. My mom, my dad, my aunt, two of my uncles, five of my cousins, my grandpa, and my grandma were/are teachers. I am planning on being and Elementary Education major in college and be a second grade-ish teacher one day. If teachers' unions continue to make it harder to get accredited, the supply of new teachers will decrease. While it does make sense to increase the required level of learning for teacher so as to have a higher quality of education available to students, by only making new teachers go through the harder process education boards aren't really changing anything. They are only thinking of how it will look to the public. If they made the new credidation level required for all teachers, the quality of education would be more likely to be better.

Laura Bartz, Chapter 8, Question 5

Qhat struck me as the most interesting was that it doesn't actually make that much of a difference in whether or not a teacher is certified in the performance of their students. Of course once I think about it more the logic becomes more clear. If you are a talented teacher a piece of paper that says you are certified won't make a difference in the performance of your students. I also find it very interesting that in spite of this data states are increasing the amount of required certification, but it wouldn't look very good to parents to see that their public school systems are letting in seemingly less qualified teachers. Which just proves that generally with economics, the rational thing to do won't happen because at face value based on what people think they know to be true, isn't what is lobbying to happen.

Caroline Paulsen, Chapter 8, Question 5

One key topic in chapter 8 that struck me as significant was about creative destruction. An example of creative destruction that the class discussed earlier this year was about new technology involved in making roads. This is particularly relevant to Minnesotans, since our roads are plagued by potholes due to our relatively extreme weather. Although the technology to make new roads that are less easily ruined exists, we decide to keep patching up the old roads or rebuilding them with lesser technology. This is a bit like Charles Wheelan's example of the Pony Express and the telegraph. With the invention of the telegraph, messages were transferred much more efficiently than they would have been by the Pony Express. However, unlike with the present-day roads, the government didn't decide to ban the telegraph because it would cause people to lose their jobs. Wheelan also points out that in general it is more helpful to retrain people in different professions than it is to ban innovations.

Chapter 8 Question 6.

A passage that stood out to me (and possibly the person who owned this book before me because a bit of it was underlined) was when it said that government taxed ethanol 5.4 cents less per gallon than gas, even though, through researched has shown that it may not be so much greater than gasoline. On the plus side for the american economy, it lowers dependence on our use of foreign oils, but it still hurts mother nature. It evaporates faster than gasoline, so it still contributes to damaging the ozone, however after another study was done, ethanol did reduce greenhouse gas emission by 12% relative to gasoline. Still, even with if all the corn crop of america was used to go towards ethanol, it would still be only a fraction, and expanding that farm land would cause even more damage to mother nature because of pesticides and chemical run off and residues.  This passage stuck out to me because it seems like every single thing is connected. This goes back to negative externalities. I also didn't understand then why would there be a tax break on a product like this which the subsidy have cost $7.1 billion to. Imagine, if there wasn't a tax break how much money could be made to go to other causes like research in finding another way to produce energy for transportation that doesn't kill the earth. Or go into public transportation so not as many people drive.

Jacky Xu,Chapter 2,Question 1

So this chapter talk about free rider,it's the people who didn't pay the same amount of fee,but enjoy the benefit too.This happens everywhere in the world.For example having a party,sometimes people didn't bring anything to the party but just simply eat and drink.Or a person is not willing to pay the fee to fix the road in front of his house,because he is hoping someone else will do it.Others will think this person will do that,the road will end up sitting there broken.
  Also I have to say that many people in our society will willing to sacrifice himself to increase the social benefit,this action is very honorable.

Jack Bexell, Chapter 4, Question 5

"If the USSR taught us anything, it is that monopoly stiles any need to be innovative or responsive to customers."

I remember learning this sophomore year, where the USSR was communist, so there was no chance of more than one company to make a product.

Lily Bjorlin, Chapter 4, Question 5

The passage that caught my eye in this chapter was when Wheelan started talking about DDT. We learned all about DDT last year in Biology and how it was just plain bad. However this chapter taught how even if something seems bad at first in the long run that bad thing might actually be good. You have to compare the overall oppurtunity cost. This especially comes in handy as we are an out to choose colleges and need to compare prices with how much we like the college and what we could learn there.

Matúš Kočalka, Chapter 4, Question 3

The author mentions, that when the government is the only provider of the services (monopoly), it is a problem. He proposed that the government should rather hire private companies to build e.g. highways, and thus not to do it by itself.
This is kind of controversial - in some countries it´s probably better solution, but in others, it´s very risky. Building a highway was an enormous issue in Slovakia a few months ago. In our government, we´ve currently a really corrupted political party that rules the whole Slovakia. By hiring private companies to build the highway instead of building it on their own, they could conceal the corruption that was going on. They simply got rid of the responsibility - since the public attention is usually on them and not on some company. So it wasn´t successful at all.
So basicaly there was a public competition, that was won by one certain company with connections to the leaders in this party even before it became public, and this company used almost all of the money for their private usage – they didn´t even pay salaries to the workers that they hired for building the highway, and now there´s no one who would pay them for their work.                                                   So in our- Slovakian case, it simply caused even worse corruption, since the government get rid of the responsibility by building it, and hired private company to do the “dirty job” instead of them.

 

Snook, Ingrid, Chapter 4 Question 2

It seems to me that the issue of the government brought up in this chapter could have short term and long term, both positive and negative, consequences. With the government controlling so many parts of society, some necessary but some really unnecessary (like the postal service talked about in this chapter) the nature of friendly business competition can't be there. The government also interfering with market flow can be detrimental in the short run. With their interference comes a lot of extra costs, but it also keeps bad entrepreneurial situations at bay which can be beneficial in the long run. In the end, it seems like what would work best is a middle ground with government involvement but that's hard to agree on.

Christen Majors, Chapter 4, Question 6

Within the first page I found Wheelans statement on the DMV. This statement eludes to his later statements on the governments  monopoly on certain aspects of human life. He goes on to say that if a rat "scampers" across the floor of you favorite resturant at which you are eating you can then decide not to eat there anymore where as if you find the DMV annoying and a nuisance, too bad. You have to have a license in order to drive or else you are going to jail. The governments monopoly on and their lack of attention to those companies and the companies inability to innovate leads to start-up solo companies that try to get the work done their way. In example, instead of the US postal service, the UPS a private owned company get the work done on their own, and may I say a lot faster.

Jack McGillivray, Chapter 4, Question 6

What I found most interesting from chapter 4 was how many different Theresa there are on how involved the government should be and how much dissension there is between economists about which one is the most effective. To me it seems amazing that there could be so many possible conclusions to what seems on the surface to be a simple question; what could the scope of government be. I have always known of the arguments for large or small government, but I never knew the intricacies of how high and low tax rates and big and small government can impact the markets. And this will certainly make me take a second look at what I believe politically before this coming election.

Yaphet May, Chapter 4 question 5

"What would your business look like if your customers, by law, could not go anywhere else?" (81 Wheelan). After reading this passage I continued to think about what it would be like. There would be no competition and products would be cheaper and workers would be payed less.

Eleanor Oakman: Chapter 4, Question 6

What I found most interesting in chapter 4 was when Wheelan brought up an example  about the slippery slope of having a good economy verses a safer environment. The chemical  DDT is used to spray over crops  to kill off bugs and is finding its way up the food system, most people would be against the harsh chemical, but surprisingly economists say different. Turns out it also decreases the chance of getting malaria! Because economists care about this so much is because if a malaria outbreak happens, the economy slows down due to all the money being used for health costs. I found this very interesting and wondered if it were a good idea to bring DDT over to Africa and spray it on their crops  to help weaken the malaria poisoning. I thought this was a very good example for me to understand about the effect of health costs to the economy and the significance  of a "safer environment" to the economy and the safety for people in the long run.

Jacky Xu,Chapter 3,Question 6

No one owns the air,so what should we do with the people who pollute CO2.People can't say that because the steel company is polluting,we will stop buying it's steel,because eventually you will need it.So the government comes.
People are smoking nowadays,of course it's bad for themselves,but it's also harmful for the people around him which have a huge externality.No one have the right to stop a person from smoking because it's his own will to become a smoker,so the government start to kick in and do things for the whole community:the government can raise the tax,decrease the smoker,and make much bigger social benefit.Now the government enter the market,instead of letting it go.Because there are laws and rules which restrict people and company.This bring the market to a new stage.

Jakcy Xu,Chapter 4,Question 5

"There are two broader lessons to be learned from this.First,government should not be the solo provider of a good or service unless there is a compelling reason to believe that the private sector will fail in the role."
   Just like the market thinking,it's control by a invisible hand.If a government try to control a good or service,for example house cleaning.All the people in the city will try to become one of the consumer,there will be just a long waiting list,to let everyone have the opportunity.
  However,sometimes government have to control good and service,for example,a drive license,if there is a company that let people have a test and give them the licenses,it will just end up if you have enough money,you can just buy one no matter you know how tho drive or not