Sponsorship of Some Political Candidates

        While we were watching the documentary on marketing, they described how profitable it would be for companies to sponsor certain celebrities.  This made me think of how companies will sponsor presidential candidates, presumably so the candidate will endorse policies that will help the companies.  That inspired me to do research of which companies sponsor which candidates so we are all fully educated on why they may favor certain policies over others.  This is a partial list.
1. Donald Trump
        Uline inc., a shipping company, UFC, the fighting championship, The Irwing Moskowitz foundation, which is trying to create "a Jewish majority in Arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem by purchasing land" (Wikipedia), Mountaire farms, a corporate chicken farm, and Vital Pharmaceuticals, which produces Bang energy drink.
2. Joe Biden
        Comcast, an internet company, Centene Corp., "large publicly traded company and a multi-line managed care enterprise that serves as a major intermediary for both government-sponsored and privately insured health care programs" (Wikipedia), The Boston Red Sox, a baseball team, Simmons Hanly Conry LLC, a mesothelioma and asbestos-related law firm.
3. Bernie Sanders
         The UC college system, Alphabet Inc., which is the parent company of Google, Amazon.com, the corporation, Microsoft, the tech company, and Kaiser Permanente, a private healthcare company.
4.  Pete Buttigieg
        Walt Disney Co., the corporation, AT&T, the service provider, Wells Fargo, the bank, JPMorgan, the investment company, and the University of Notre Dame.
5.  Elizabeth Warren
        IBM, the tech company, New York City, New York University, the college, the UC system, and Apple inc., the tech giant.

Venezuela's Economic Sanctions

Due to the economic humanitarian crisis in Venezuela, many are pushing for action to pressure Venezuela and especially their leader, Maduro, to end their current policies which harm the Venezuelan people. However, who is to blame, Maduro himself, or the US for implementing economic sanctions on Venezuela to weaken its economy? Based on current trends, economic sanctions have been the most effective in actually pressuring Maduro to change his policies and, in turn, improve the situation in Venezuela.

Maduro’s mismanagement of the economy, rather than economic sanctions, has caused Latin America’s largest migration–about 4 million Venezuelans–in recent years driven by hyperinflation, violence, and food and medicine shortages. The dramatic fall in the oil price in 2014 simply exposed the damage inflicted on the oil industries by Chavez and Maduro over the course of nearly 20 years. The problem was due to a lack of revenues to keep the basics running, problems that are compounded by corruption and a lack of security in the country.

Oil comprises 95% of Venezuela's exports and 25% of its GDP. In January 2019 during the Venezuelan presidential crisis, the United States imposed sanctions on the Venezuelan oil company PDVSA. As a result, by cutting off the biggest source of cash for Maduro’s government through oil exports to the US, sales plummeted by 40% in just one week, paralyzing the administration’s finances to weaken its overall power. This caused a significant problem for the government and its economy as quickly these sanctions caused the oil industry to weaken more than in previous years.

As a result, these economic sanctions caused Maduro to be pressured to change his economic policy. Maduro has allowed Venezuelan state oil company PDVSA to let some joint venture partners take over the day-to-day operation of oil fields. Maduro, in turn, began privatizing the sector in order to allow joint-ventures to directly promote profit and production in the oil industry. As a result, there was increased production in oil and a period of economic growth began. With the privatization of oil in Venezuela, oil production averaged 926,000 barrels from 761,000 in a month–a 22% increase. In fact, in the first 11 days of November 2019, Venezuela exported, with the help of Russian oil company Rosnet, just about 11 million barrels of oil—more than twice as much in the same period of October. There were also positive effects in helping alleviate the economic humanitarian crisis in Venezuela. Under Maduro’s regime and mismanagement, more than 300,000 people are at risk due to a lack of medical care and resources. However, after the policy change in the oil industry, positive results are already being seen as inflation is now on a downward trend with 23.5% in September 2019, as compared to 65.2% percent in August 2019.

Therefore, economic sanctions, so far, have been a key strategy in pressuring Maduro to change his policies, and in turn, improve the situation in Venezuela. His power and presence in Venezuela are not going away anytime soon as he is embarking on a term that extends until 2025. He was re-elected for a second term in the summer of 2019 (even though there were reports and rumors of his interference in the results). Therefore, economic sanctions have been probably one of the only strategies that have pressured Maduro to change. If sanctions aren’t put in place, his mismanagement of the economy will continue. He only changed his policies once harsher sanctions were placed on the oil industry in January of 2019.

Ultimately, while Venezuela's economic and humanitarian crisis still remains a significant issue, economic sanctions on the country are an important strategy to note in pressuring the country (and most notably, its aggressive leader) to change.

Sources:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/10/world/americas/venezuela-maduro-inauguration.html
https://www.worldvision.org/disaster-relief-news-stories/venezuela-crisis-facts
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/032515/how-does-price-oil-affect-venezuelas-economy.asp
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=a0f80ec4-9022-4575-8360-ed9ecdb7f47c
www.nytimes.com/2019/02/08/world/americas/venezuela-sanctions-maduro.html?auth=login-google.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-oil-ramirez-exclusive/exclusive-weakened-by-sanctions-venezuelas-pdvsa-cedes-oilfield-operations-to-foreign-firms-idUSKBN1Z221R
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-venezuela-economy/maduro-says-thank-god-for-dollarization-in-venezuela-idUSKBN1XR0RV

The Influencer Economy

Products from places such as Fashion Nova, Sugar Bear Hair, Dietary Teas, and others have been at the center of the growing impact of Social Media and its 'influencers' in the marketing strategies of companies, and in turn, the economy as well.

This industry is now worth almost $2 billion, and in 2021, this industry is projected to reach numbers as high as $5-$10 billion. Those who build a large presence and following on social media sites such as Instagram are considered to be influencers as they build a sort of support system of followers and fans due to their posts regarding lifestyle, jobs/hobbies, clothing, or even their stories. This personal connection that social media platforms foster between the influencer and their followers helps this sort of system to be successful.

Businesses utilize these influencers to promote their products to their target audiences. For example, fitness brands will recruit and sponsor fitness influencers and lifestyle or clothing brands will do the same. Previously, influencers promoted products in exchange for a gift or a product from the company. However, this aspect has now changed into exchanges of gifts as well as monetary charges. In fact, Kylie Jenner, one of Instagram's biggest influencers with over 140 Million followers, reportedly makes about $1.2 Million per sponsored post on the site.

This strategy works as this style of marketing allows brands to reach their target audiences in a more genuine and personal way than traditional means of advertising such as billboards or paid ads. This is because rather than businesses directly selling and promoting their products to their consumers, they build relationships with influencers that already have built that specific connection with their followers. In turn, this system allows brands to pay influencers instead of traditional advertisements to promote their products as followers of the influencer would more likely purchase something recommended by someone they follow or look up to. It's kind of like asking a friend for help choosing a certain product.

However, even with the significant profits that come with the emergence of this marketing strategy, there are still some concerns. For lifestyle influencers such as Kylie Jenner, many of their followers tend to be younger girls, and by promoting products such as dietary teas and supplements, it could be harmful towards their supportive audience. Additionally, with the growing number of sponsored posts, influencer pages could begin to seem less genuine if their posts are the majority of their content. Therefore, while there is definitely a lot of potential in this new marketing strategy, it is important to notice the possible harms that can and have emerged.


Sources:
https://qz.com/1708956/the-benefits-of-the-influencer-economy/
https://www.hopperhq.com/blog/instagram-influencer-marketing-2020/
https://www.allure.com/story/kylie-jenner-how-much-paid-per-sponsored-instagram-post

An Economic Predictor of Highly Contagious Disease?

       The year is 2020.  Just one day before we welcomed the new decade, Wuhan, China announced that they were treating dozens of locals for something.  That something has now taken the world by storm—known today as the coronavirus, or COVID-19 by the World Health Organization, this disease may not show itself via symptoms for up to two weeks.  Such an epidemic is not foreign to youth today, who have lived through the ebola crisis; adults have been around long enough to see SARS come and go as well.  It was rather the fact that the Chinese government hid the existence of such a highly contagious disease for months (to save face) that shocked the world, and it left us asking: how can we make ourselves aware of health dangers that governments don't want to tell us about until it may be too late?
        The answer: stocks of businesses that provide disease-preventative supplies.  One mask manufacturer in China, Lanhine, explained 200 million protective face masks are in demand daily now.  However, given that citizens of Wuhan have been aware of this disease for much longer than the global population has been, Lanhine stocks were spiking during the days preceding Wuhan's recognition of the virus.  Some people argue that the Chinese government created the coronavirus to serve as a biological weapon, and this belief would only further support the idea that local residents were taking advantage of their early knowledge.  In the case that the disease was an unfortunate product of problematic poultry/fish markets, as is suggested to be the origin by many scientists and the Chinese government, those residents of Wuhan who had not yet fallen ill would likely purchase and hoard masks to protect themselves.
         This is simply an observation that I and many others have made: when demand for anti-contagion health products increases significantly, it is likely the result of a fearful contagious disease.  Take it with a grain of salt, but do recognize that this pattern has followed since the SARS epidemic not too long ago.  In an increasingly globalizing world, disease spreads faster; the simultaneous benefit is one of a globalized economy that can suggest through market fairings that such a disease even exists.

Marketing

We are surrounded by marketing. Some are more obvious than others. Our attention goes to the billboards as we are driving down the freeway. We notice advertisements on buses, and before youtube videos, in magazines, and popping up on websites. Us younger people have grown up with this, we don’t tend to notice it, we don’t tend to mind. There is a sort of food chain. An add on a coke makes us want to watch a movie, the main character is drinking a coke so we want one too, and this coke advertises for another movie, and that movie advertises a car, which sells a story. Advertisers and marketers are storytellers. They appeal to our psychology and attempt to connect with us. 

Social media allows these interactions to be easier and less one-sided. The consumers may now directly communicate to producers what they want. Supply and demand has never been so easy. Through surveys and social media sharing your interests. Personalized feeds try to sell you what you already like, and this tells influencers and sales-people what their audiences are looking for. It's a constant communication, a battle for producers to sell as much as they can, with consumers questioning as little as possible.

Beyond that… networking. Whether via digital or face-to-face, people influence people. One person’s interests attract another, and as they share this product is passed from person to person. As I have mentioned above, it all occurs in a certain chain, everything can be mapped out. We are all walking advertisements, without the monetary gain, and we just don’t seem to mind.

How Ronald Reagan killed Harley-Davidson

Harley-Davidson as proof of the effect of tariffs 

Harley-Davidson is the oldest motorcycle brand in America and the Harley-Davidson logo, as well as motorcycles, have become iconic with American culture. So when the company bought itself back for 80 million dollars from a holding company called AMA in an attempt to save itself from Total brand failure Harley-Davidson turn to Ronald Reagan to help support what they call a brand evolution.  President Ronald Reagan recognizing the weight of the Harley-Davidson name and in his words “how it stood for America and American culture itself” Fought to keep the brand from failing. At the time the main competitor of Harley-Davidson was Japanese motorcycle Brands such as Honda and Suzuki which were completely out competing Harley-Davidson in price and quality. In response, Ronald Reagan took the 4% import tax for Japanese motorcycles and increased it to 45%.

This massive increase in tariffs on the Japanese motorcycle Brands gave Harley-Davidson breathing room to rebuild their brand. But did it work?  wall Harley-Davidson was once again able to gain traction inside the large high-end motorcycle Marketplace They never became competitive with Brands such as Honda are Suzuki to this day. Harley-Davidson sells roughly about 250,000 motorcycles every year compared to the 15 million that Honda sells annually they never fully recovered. But the question remains why didn't it work?

the answer lies in the fact that by putting such a high tariff on foreign imports Harley-Davidson was not incentivized to innovate. The main factor that put Suzuki and Honda so far ahead of Harley-Davidson was the fact that they were continuously innovating and designing new technology that put them ahead of the  Curve. By essentially removing competition from Harley-Davidson they did not have to adapt to a competitive Marketplace. This example highlights one of the many faults with tariffs which is a removes incentives to innovate. As competition breeds innovation. some would argue that if Ronald Reagan had rather subsidized R&D for Harley-Davidson rather than remove their competition could they be a more competitive brand today. That question is harder to answer but the one that I believe is pretty clear here is that purely putting a terrorist on the Constitution does not guarantee the success of a brand. 

Sources 

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/07/24/trump-harley-davidson-reagan-trade.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4N7RcNHs9E

Black Friday's Economic Impact

The ever most popular Black Friday, which is an annual discounted shopping day that takes place the day after Thanksgiving has been a busy shopping day for decades. Black Friday was at first used to describe the stock market collapse of 1869, when investors caused a financial meltdown.  Around the 1940s came the modern concept of Black Friday to entice customers to their shops and the name was inspired by the traffic accidents this day brings. As the 80s came around, Black Friday became a substantial marketing tool and is now the most popular shopping day of the year.

Black Friday has a large impact on retail spending, consumers, the economy, and stock results. It is well-known that Black Friday influences consumers to spend money by allowing them to feel like they are saving tons of money. It is advertised as a rare opportunity to get amazing deals and bargains on products. Every year the retail sales volume increases as the percentage of spendings go up. 

 There is a debate on Black Friday’s impact on the economy. The amount of consumers spending on this day drives economic activity, which leads to the Keynesian effect. Furthermore, the stock market can be affected by having extra days off during the Holidays. Some say that Black Friday keeps the US from going into recession, while others say there are only short-term effects.

Sources:

https://www.dailyfx.com/forex/education/trading_tips/daily_trading_lesson/2019/11/13/black-friday-stock-market.html

https://www.thebalance.com/why-is-it-called-black-friday-3305712

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/102714/how-stock-market-affected-thanksgiving-and-black-friday.asp

Modern-Day Cool Hurting

Do we decide what we buy?

Since the introduction in integration of larger and more in-depth social media Platforms in the past decade, there has been a surge in a new type of employment. It's a new slice of Niche marketing known as influencers. These individuals typically find themselves celebrity-like status with their Fame coming to them through popularity on social media platforms. This popularity then turns into a business opportunity when Brands can approach these individuals with deals to promote their products. At this point, the individual has become an influencer. 

The effects of influencers can be seen in recent times such as 2016 where Kylie Jenner and a series of other popular social media personalities began wearing Champion branded clothing and posting the brand on social media. The previously relatively obscure brand saw a 70% sales increase across the next two years with projections of two double sales by the year 2022. The brand itself has recognized the serious impact that social media influencers have had on its reputation. Call Champion claims that their increase in popularity due to social media influence was purely organic. The effect Still Remains the Same the select group of individuals was able to influence the demand for large sections of the market.

This comes back to the opening question “do we decide what we buy?” As seen in the late 90s with the emergence of cool hunting marketing there were entire marketing agencies centered around the idea of finding Trends before they took off and then handing those trends to corporations so they could be sold back to the consumer. But with the power of modern-day influencers do corporations now have the ability to set the trends for the consumer by partnering with influencers to promote their brands do corporations now have the power to make themselves the trend?  I would argue that corporations now have the power to set demands trends in their targeted demographics by selecting an influencer with an audience inside their targeted demographic and then pain that influencer to promote their product. 

So in conclusion influencers are the modern-day more effective version of celebrity endorsements with the added benefit that often times it goes unnoticed that an influencer is engaging in an ad when promoting a product. This relatively new marketing technique has given at least for the time being corporations the ability to set trends by monetarily engaging with influencers that impact their Target demographic. So I believe now we really don't choose what we buy. 

Sources 

https://www.google.com/search?q=popularity+of+the+word+influencer+timeline&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiUk_SDwennAhWS4J4KHd_XBf0Q_AUoAnoECA0QBA&biw=1426&bih=818&safe=active&ssui=on#imgrc=AFlSVCHjJGRWiM

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/13/mike-bloomberg-pays-influencers-to-post-memes-for-2020-campaign.html

https://www.thebiglead.com/posts/keeping-it-100-champion-is-surging-in-its-centennial-after-celebrity-influence-01dkv36sj2ky

Spotify Marketing

After watching "The Merchant of Cool" documentary, I realized as laughable as the marketing strategies were in our eyes, it probably had a significant effect on teens of that generation. Today, companies are continuing to adapt to the ever changing culture and demographics by employing strategies to captivate teens just as they had done in the documentary. One of the most successful examples of this is Spotify, a music streaming service that has 124 million paid premium subscribers out of the 271 million active users. These stats show that Spotify has successfully appealed to the values of self-expression and identity of our generation. They do this through a number of ways.

One thing Spotify does is that it customizes the content you see based on your listening and search history. This allows them to constantly target each individual user with certain genres of music they might like, giving the user a more customized experience. On top of that, Spotify uses algorithms to generate playlists that are custom made for each individual user. This further illustrates how Spotify creates a sort of feedback loop where the more the user interacts with it, the more it is tailored to the user and the user's definition of what music is "cool".

The not so shocking reality is that the marketing strategies we saw in the documentary is effective even today. The only difference is that it has evolved and adapted to cultural shifts. Instead of MTV, ads are now being shown on social media platforms like Instagram and YouTube.




Sources: https://newsroom.spotify.com/company-info/

Minimum Wage: Can the increase have an impact on employment?

Minimum wage has been around in the United States since 1938 and was established through the Fair Labor Standards Act. It was originally set to an hourly payment of 25 cents and slowly increased through inflation. Minimum wage has experienced 22 separate increases, a recent one was enacted in 2009 by President Obama. Each state is free to set their own minimum wage with the restriction of not going under the set federal minimum wage. California holds the highest minimum wage in the nation and will continue to increase to $15 an hour in year 2022. The question is: how much of an impact will this have on employment and the well beings of individual workers?

Competitive markets work to meet an equilibrium wage that affects the supply and quantity of labor demanded. The wage amount defines the amount of labor that is in demand. When it comes to a free market situation for labor, the equilibrium wage allows the supply and demand for quantity of labor to be equal. Higher wages changes the equilibrium price and quantity in markets that are being created by the minimum wage workers. An increase in minimum wage will shift up the supply curve in markets, which will create movement along the demand curve and lead to a new equilibrium. The market decrease as a result from a minimum wage increase, is dependent on the firm’s output of price elasticity for demand. When the demand is inelastic, there is less employment decrease versus when demand is elastic. This shows that the increase in minimum wage has an individual effect for each market. 

Elasticity has a large impact on unemployment and the increasing minimum wage. Whether the demand for labor is inelastic or elastic, an increase in minimum wage will result in an employment reduction. However, unemployment is higher when labor is elastic versus inelastic. When the market for a firm’s output is not competitive, the demand for labor is determined by both the marginal product of labor and the amount of reduction in price when it comes to selling more output. 

From a policy perspective, the fact that an increase in minimum wage leads to a reduced exployment does not mean that an increase is totally a bad idea, it just means there is a tradeoff of pros and cons. This includes a benefit for those who have an income increase and a loss for those who no longer have jobs.

https://www.thoughtco.com/increased-minimum-wage-impact-4019618
https://saylordotorg.github.io/text_microeconomics-theory-through-applications/s14-02-the-effects-of-a-minimum-wage.html

Wow! That's such a great deal!

You might think that you're getting a good deal on that 50% sale, but there's a good chance that "sale" price could be the original price that the company was selling the product for (or higher!). In fact,  right before Black Friday, retailers raised their prices by 23% for toys and tools. Many of these deals are worse than the ones offered at different times in the year.

Why do companies do this obviously deceptive marketing? Because it works. When former JC Penny CEO Ron Johnson decided that was going to change JC Penny's buisness model from one based around "everyday low prices" to one with literal "everyday low prices" (no sales), sales plunged 4.3 Billion Dollars, or 25% from the previous year. Customers like to feel like they are getting a good deal, especially at the big box store like JC Penny. After only 17 Months, JC Penny forced Johnson out, going back to their original strategy of sales and markups.

It's interesting to see how consumers fall for these marketing strategies. While some may question why Kohl's always seem to have a sale, the majority see that there is a sale and want to capitalize on it.

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/11/how-retailers-trick-you-their-amazing-black-friday-discounts/355525/

https://www.businessinsider.com/black-friday-insider-secrets-2017-11#theyll-even-sometimes-increase-the-normal-price-of-an-item-before-the-holidays-to-make-the-discount-seem-deeper-7

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/27/business/jcpenney-history/index.html

Subtle Advertising

When we watched the documentaries last week in class, all of us cringed when the advertising agency classified themselves as "coolhunters". But what about when the advertising isn't as blatant?

It's really obvious when someone famous is peddling the newest edible Tide Pod or posting about how they enjoyed their meal at McDonald's. It's harder to determine if the random Reddit User who is raving about how they swear by a specific cheap Chinese clone of Airpods is legit.

On one hand, maybe he really did buy the headphones and wanted to share his experience. Or, he could be paid by the manufacturers to peddle them. You could check his posting history, but when companies are paying hundreds of dollars for reputable Reddit accounts, even that can't be trusted.

There are even guides available to companies who want to "market" through online forums. One of the first steps is to "not post marketing messages right away" in order to avoid the automated moderating on some online forums. Other steps also include "don't push it", (only bring up the product when its relevant) and "do contribute" to become a "valued contributor" to the site.


Companies shouldn't advertise this way; it's frankly despicable to deceive consumers in this way. Unfortunately, even if they do get found out and blacklisted, they will simply go resurface under a different name.

The next time you see someone who might be trying to push a product too hard, take it with a grain of salt.



https://medium.com/@Rob79/what-i-learned-selling-my-reddit-accounts-c5e9f6348005
https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/223900

Measure D - Rent Control vs Economy

While going through my mail this weekend, I saw that we had received a flyer from the City of Mountain View to support Measure D. Measure D is to be placed on the March ballot to further rent control regulations. The measure would limit rent increases to 4% per year, make apartments safer and energy-efficient, protect taxpayers, and give the council a chance to expand renter protections to mobile home residents. Although the measure may be beneficial to renters, it actually creates some problems in the economy.

By trying to keep the price down with a price ceiling (limit on how high rent can be), the council would be setting the price below the equilibrium. This means it will be lower than the place where the quantity demanded (of houses by renters) equals quantity supplied (available houses to be rented), thus creating a housing shortage. In terms of consumer (buyer’s maximum price - the price paid) and producer surplus (price - sellers minimum), setting a limit would not allow both to be maximized. When the market is not efficient (maximized) it creates a deadweight loss.

Rent control may be beneficial to certain people, but may not be the best move in economic terms. When this dilemma occurs, what is a possible solution? Who should be put first?

https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2020/02/11/mountain-view-rent-control-measure-d-stirs-heated-debate/

https://pressbooks.bccampus.ca/uvicecon103/wp-content/uploads/sites/58/2016/11/Figure-4.6b.jpg

https://d2eehagpk5cl65.cloudfront.net/img/q60/uploads/assets/db/15199380399455.jpg

Social Media Advertisements

Advertisements used to mean a page in a magazine, maybe a section in a newspaper, or a short clip during the break of a television show. Now when I think of an advertisement, I think of those that permeate social media. There are advertisements on Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, Youtube, and essentially every social media application I can think of.

We spend about 24 hours online every week. Social media is mostly made up for consumers, but there are a few producers every now and then. Consumers want goods and services to be accessible to them and through joining social media, that is exactly what producers are attempting to do.

Companies can pay Instagram to slip and advertisement in our feed, from someone we do not even follow. Or maybe they create a Snapchat filter or subscription. Another popular method of advertisement is through influencers, a method that is present regardless of the platform.

Influencers are celebrities that brands know have the ability to persuade others. This can be because of their authority, knowledge, high follower count, and relationship with their fans. Their fans look up to their influencers, so when they promote a product the fans believe the high praise that the influencer is giving it. The influencer's job is to make a few posts positively raving about a good or service.

I understand that companies and influencers are trying to use social media to generate money and customers, but what happens when customers get annoyed from these constant advertisements? When I see an advertisement on any platform, I immediately get annoyed - I turn a blind eye to whatever is in front of me and skip through it.

Additionally, I have seen many influencers claim they love products that either look cheap or end up having a bad review. For example, on Youtube there were many creators sponsored by "DevaCurl," a curly hair cream brand. For years they sponsored it, but many customers claimed it made their hair fall out and it made their curls loose.

All and all, I think there are some issues with social media advertisements. I feel like producers are getting ignored when they post, but also they can make influencers lose credibility. I have seen these issues to be reoccurring. I know they are little, but companies spending millions on advertisements need to find a way to do so and get the most bang for their buck, while also keeping social media users happy.


Sources:
https://www.mdgadvertising.com/marketing-insights/infographics/how-social-media-changed-the-ad-game-infographic/

https://www.mdgadvertising.com/marketing-insights/infographics/how-social-media-changed-the-ad-game-infographic/

Supreme: The Stolen Hype

On any social media site, you are bound to see the influence and impact of the streetwear company, "Supreme," being worn by internet influences, so-called hypebeasts, and countless teenagers.

Outside of social media, Supreme's impact is exemplified as well. Individuals are willing to stand in line for hours and pay hundreds of dollars to get exclusive, limited edition clothing and sometimes even items such as bricks, crowbars, and other strange items.

However, when looking into the many controversies that this company is involved in–even regarding its iconic logo–Supreme's image shifts to one of its stolen hype.

In fact, its very logo–now almost immediately recognizable–was a rip-off from artist Barbara Kruger's designs. The company never gave her any credit, but they did admit that her work "influenced" the Supreme logo. If you look at her work in comparison with the Supreme Logo, there is almost no difference. Therefore, the logo–one of the biggest reasons for its growing influence–could be argued to have been "stolen."

But the controversy doesn't stop there. The Carlyle Group purchased a 50% share in Supreme back in 2017, a group that also has shares in other big companies such as McDonald's, AMC, and various oil companies. The group, now one of the biggest investors in the company, also has a 23% stake in the US-based electronics firm Wesco, which has a contract with the British defense company BAE Systems. Wesco and BAE work together to support jet, the Typhoon, which is used by the Saudis to bomb Yemen. While it may be argued that Supreme had no idea about this when they sold their shares, it is still important to note that a clothing brand as big as Supreme and its purchases indirectly contribute to the crisis in Yemen.

While Supreme's growth doesn't seem to be slowing down, it is important to note the problematic aspects that this company–as well as other big companies–are involved in. Additionally, it is interesting to see how much people are willing to ignore for the sake of cool clothing and so-called "hype."

Sources:
https://www.1843magazine.com/style/the-hype-economy
https://qz.com/quartzy/1468481/hasan-minhaj-buying-supreme-is-immoral-and-lame/

The Tampon Tax as a factor of Inequity: Why does this exist?

A 2019 study by Consumer Health Day reports that due to cost, two-thirds of low-income women had to go without feminine hygiene products at least once each year. About 21 percent said this happened on a monthly basis, and nearly half said they often had to make tough choices between buying food or period-related products. In fact, there are even consequences for employment. According to the study, 36 percent of the women said they had missed days of work due to lack of adequate period hygiene.

One primary cause of women’s inability to afford basic menstrual products is the tampon tax. In a majority of US States, menstrual products are taxed as non-essential and luxury items. The sales tax is enacted on these products while items such as groceries and prescription drugs are exempt from this tax. Now, many opponents of the menstrual tax reform movement may argue that this exemption only applies to one specific group of people, and therefore, they are not essential. However, products for men such as Viagra, which are not essential products, are exempt from this tax.

The high prices of menstrual products negatively impact women’s opportunities to comfort and, in some cases, women’s opportunities to live. In 2017, Vice reported that the sales tax on menstrual products has led to many poor and homeless women to resort to harmful alternatives such as bleeding through their clothes, using cardboard, old rags, socks, and other items to combat their monthly burdens, which can lead to infections like Toxic Shock Syndrome, HPV, and other life-threatening infections. 

Currently, only 15 out of the 50 states have exempted the tampon tax, which means that 35 states are still taxing menstrual products as non-essential items. But they are anything but non-essential. They shouldn't be deemed as non-essential items when some women have to choose whether to buy food, pay for transportation, or buy period-related products. They shouldn’t be deemed as non-essential items when some women are vulnerable to life-threatening diseases without them. 

Now, the federal government must take initiative to end this tax that is enacted on tampons and menstrual products for the sake of millions of women. It is time for Congress to provide for the common defense and the general welfare of the United States of all Americans–both male and female. Having a period is definitely not a luxury, so let’s stop taxing them as if they are one.

Sources:

www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/01/08/the-tampon-tax-explained/

www.today.com/health/nevada-voters-eliminate-tampon-tax-midterm-elections-t141544

taxfoundation.org/tampon-taxes-sales-tax/
www.nytimes.com/2018/07/22/health/tampon-tax-periods-menstruation-nyt.html
www.huffingtonpost.com/sue-kerr/if-you-cant-afford-tampons-what-do-you-do_b_5352396.html.
consumer.healthday.com/pregnancy-information-29/menstruation-news-473/two-thirds-of-poor-u-s-women-can-t-afford-menstrual-pads-tampons-study-741590.html
impact.vice.com/en_us/article/j5e9qb/tampons-are-a-necessity-not-a-luxury
www.crs.gov

https://fortune.com/2019/06/11/tampon-tax-us-states/

Economics in the Goonies

Movies often include underlying themes and messages. Many may be related to economics and economic theories. The Goonies, released in 1985, tells the story of 2 brothers about to move from the town they grew up in. It is explained that their neighborhood was bought by investors planning on building a golf course. They cannot afford to move within the town so the movie begins on their last day in town. The main character’s friends come over and they discover a treasure map and go on an adventure to find a pirate’s treasure. There are many indirect economic factors in this movie.

1. Supply and Demand

A very common thing in demand is money and opportunities to make money. A common economic concern has to do with employment and access to money. The beginning conflict is that the family cannot afford to stay. There is an antagonist family also looking for the treasure for different reasons. Much demand for an already seemingly scare prize, but in this case the supply was highly scarce as it is one collection of treasure lost for many decades. Many people have tried to find it, but none have succeeded. 

  2. Opprotunity Cost

The reason they go on this adventure, besides the possibility of gaining a fortune, is to spend their last day doing something amazing together. They realize it was this, or sitting in the house all day sulking. They chose to spend one last adventure together.

3. Externalities

As they go on this underground trip, other characters are impacted such as bystanders, restaurant owners, and fellow students. There are some cases during the trip when the bad guys kill people they come into contact with as means for covering their tracks or to gain insight.

Supply and Demand: The environment

The environment is full of both depletable and non depletable resources. Being considered a “common good” these resources are often taken for granted. Many of these are fixed and limited in nature. These include items such as water, land, and natural gas. The overuse of these common goods may eventually lead to their destruction. There is a scarcity but people are often so worried about their profit and their “minor” impact that they fail to realize the big picture. Common goods are in high demand. 

Solutions to this oblivious state of mind are often taken into consideration by the government. Charging corporations (taxing) for their pollution of the air and water. Charging people for land and natural gas. Through regulations and taxation the govt puts a limit on these resources, challenging consumers to consider their wants, needs and, well, utility. They make available the supply based on the demand and can raise the prices based on these wants/necessities. 

Jeff Bezos: The Richest Man In The World

        Jeff Bezos - president and founder of Amazon, the world's richest person, and America's 25th-largest land owner was born to a single, 17-year-old mother in 1964 in Albequerque.  He then went on to become CNBC's businessman of the decade and an incredibly influential figure in global and domestic economies, not to mention the head of one of the most profitable corporations in the world.  But how did he do it and what is he doing with his net worth of $123.9 billion dollars today?
       Upon its founding in 1994, Amazon was an online bookstore operated out of his own garage.  The company went public three years later, riding the wave of the newly-founded internet.  He later expanded the company to include other merchandise and goods, where it slowly but surely transformed into the Amazon we know and love.  In 2000, Bezos founded Blue Origin, which promised to put average human beings into space.  Blue Origin, despite not being super widely known, is actually doing quite well with successful flights to and from space holding 'dummy' passengers.  Bezos also acquired The Washington Post in 2013 for a mere $250M (in cash, no less).  Throughout his career, he has acquired many companies and startups in the quest to ever-expand Amazon.  Some notable ones include Whole Foods, Goodreads, Ring(the electronic doorbell company), IMDb, Zappos, Twitch, Audible, and numerous others.
      So what is he doing with all that money? Not paying taxes! And thus getting richer! Amazon payed $0 in federal tax dollars in 2019.  It is estimated that if they did pay taxes, Amazon would pay roughly $6 billion dollars per year.  Which is actually very small, considering the amount they make every year.  This would be the equivalent of the average person paying $475 per year compared to their net worth.  But literally why does anyone need this much money? What can you buy that is worth more than single-handedly ending homelessness in the US, which Bezos could do, by the way.  What could you  have that is worth more than your own humanity?
       I think it's hard to be ethical when you are literally the richest person alive and who has ever lived.  So, personally, I think it's good that no one clapped for him at the Oscars on Sunday because he doesn't deserve it.

Comparing the Asia Financial Crisis and the 2008 Financial Crisis

Comparing the Asia Financial Crisis and the 2008 Financial Crisis


Recently we discussed globalization in class and the 1997 Asia financial crisis. When I learned about how the US government bailed out the countries in economic crisis, I thought of another, more recent, economic crisis that involved government bailouts, the 2008 housing crisis. This made me wonder if these two economic crisis had any similar causes, and if the 2008 crisis could have been predicted by looking at the Asia crisis.
To briefly summarize, the 2008 crisis was caused by banks giving out mortgages to people with bad credit, also known as subprime mortgages in order to build mortgage-backed-security that were in demand as they seemed like a safe investment. However, as subprime lending continued, people started to default on their mortgages, creating a large influx of houses into the market, lowering the value of houses, bankrupting large financial institutions, causing a ripple effect throughout the economic web of liabilities, assets, and risks. What followed was economic recession on a global scale.
It seems that financial crises have similar causes that include risky loans, excessive speculation, and lack of government regulation. Large financial institutions heavily invest into what seems to be stable markets, and are ill prepared for when those markets unexpectedly crashes, forcing them into bankruptcy or government bailouts. Because of globalization, these large institutions have so much influence over the global economy, when they fail, the whole economy goes with them.

We Really Did Shut Up and Dribble Huh

Last week or a few weeks ago (not sure), we talked about globalization and the Asian markets. It reminded me of when I read about Clinton deciding to pursue trade with China in the late 90's early 2000's. Many people were against opening up trade with China because of their Human Right's Violations, and the Tian An Men Square incident happened relatively recently in 1989.

Clinton made the announcement to pursue trade under the reasoning, it will better both America's economy and improve China's situation. "The question is not whether we approve of or disapprove of China's practices. The question is, what's the smartest thing to improve, these practices?" In other words, he thought trade with China would allow American ideals to be adopted in China for China to be more about freedom, liberty, etc.

China joined the WTO in 2001; US businesses started investing in China and China started investing in the US. The NBA was one of these businesses that first opened their markets to China. Basketball was introduced to China in the 1950s; and even though China's communist party banned most foreign sports, basketball became a national sport. 

The 2002 first draft pick for the Houston Rockets was the now-famous Chinese basketball icon, Yao Ming. China had never produced a star player on the NBA level, and Yao Ming made it possible for Chinese people to be involved in the NBA. 200 million Chinese viewers watched Yao Ming's first game against the Lakers in 2003, compared to 9.9 million domestic viewers that watched the 2003 FINALS. 

Yao became the Chinese endorsement model, for Coke, Gatorade, Apple, etc. The Rockets became China's favorite team, simply because Yao was on it. The NBA began sending their players to China on summer tours for marketing and promotions. 

The league's popularity boosted; 490 million Chinese people streamed the NBA finals last year. <---- The entire US population is 330 million.....

Ok, so I know I've just been spewing information, but basically the NBA saw China as a huge market. However, everything was threatened the summer of 2019 when Houston Rockets General Manager Daryl Morey tweeted, "Fight for Freedom, Stand with Hong Kong"

In Chinese people saw this as an act to break up and weaken China. The Chinese Consulate for Houston said that this tweet was an "error" and asked Morey to correct it, which he did. The rest of the summer was damage control for the Rockets. 

The Chinese government cancelled all preseason broadcasted games on national TV, and Tencent suspended their streaming service of the Rockets. In Shanghai, workers tore down ads for upcoming games, people protested the NBA outside the stadiums. Fans even tore up their tickets in support of the Chinese government. 

This may seem like a shock, but hear me out. The Hong Kong thing is definitely a Human Rights issue, but to the Chinese people it is a threat to their sovereignty. No state wants to be split up, and the people don't want to either. It would be the similar to saying, "The Confederate South should be free of the Union's sovereignty" which we didn't and won't allow that. It's a perspective thing.

Even though the NBA technically stood by Morey's tweet of expression, they undercut their words with their actions. You may remember the reporter being shut down by the NBA when asking James Harden and Russell Westbrook what they thought of the tweet.

Other companies have faced the wrath of the Chinese government as well, learning not to cross certain boundaries. Usually these are: Taiwan, Tibet, and Tian An Men ----now Hong Kong as well.

Because China has the population and the ability to withhold access to the consumer market, they have forced the US to bend to their will in order to continue selling goods and services. Doing business in China means following their rules. Clinton's vision was to profit of China's market and hopefully share our democratic ideals with China, but the reality of globalizing has made China import their censorship into America.

One Unintended Benefit of Globalization: No More Dysentery

While we often think of dysentery as something we get from playing "Oregon Trail", it's actually still prevalent to this day. Dysentery is caused by bacteria in your gut, and is most often caused by eating contaminated foods. Most stories of people getting dysentery are from travelers going to India or China where the food safety standards are not as high as the United States. Locals, having built up a resistance to the bacteria, but travelers are especially susceptible. For ordinary people, getting dysentery means missing out on a few days of exciting sightseeing. But what about professional athletes, whose sole purpose in life is to stay as physically fit as they can? The answer, surprisingly, is globalization.

Athletes such as Usain Bolt who want to stay healthy during international visits turn to McDonald's to satisfy their nutritional needs. Unlike hotels or local restaurants, McDonald's sources all of their food from reputable sources as they want to maintain a good public image. That means that the chicken nuggets you get here in America are exactly the same as the ones you would get in China. Usain Bolt, taking advantage of this fact, ate 100 chicken nuggets a day during the 10 days he spent in Beijing for the Olympics. While eating only chicken nuggets might get boring after a meal or two, for some athletes it's an acceptable price to pay.

While having these notable "American" brands does take business from local restaurants and spreads the American way of eating unhealthy foods to other cultures, I still think that the fast food companies' expansion to foreign markets is a benefit. It allows areas with the restaurants to experience economic growth in the form of jobs, skills, and benefits that can boost workers towards a higher economic status. Avoiding the diarrhea is another benefit too, but I don't know many tourists who only eat McDonald's.



https://time.com/3912896/usain-bolt-chicken-mcnuggets-olympics/
https://corporate.mcdonalds.com/corpmcd/scale-for-good/our-food.html
https://business.financialpost.com/opinion/how-greedy-mcdonalds-became-the-most-effective-poverty-fighter-in-the-country

Coronavirus: Global Economic Impacts

When news of the coronavirus outbreak in Wuhan, China, broke out in late December, concerns not only about global health but also about the global economy spread. China has become a crucial part of the global economy as the world’s largest manufacturer and trader, and accounts for about one-sixth of global economic output. However, with the outbreak of the coronavirus, thousands of stores have closed and many companies have either stopped or slowed production of goods in China. Airlines have canceled 25,000 flights to and within China due to ticket sales collapsing, and companies are limiting their employees’ travel to China. Car manufacturing factories are delaying production. MKM Partners predicts that Imax Corp. will lose roughly $200 million in global box office sales in the first quarter if the epidemic continues for more than a few weeks.

Almost twenty years ago, SARS had similar impacts on the global market (China had just joined the WTO), but the economy rebounded rather quickly. However, because international companies have increasingly begun to rely on China as both a major consumer and a major manufacturer, it is predicted that the worldwide impact of this strain of the coronavirus could be bigger than SARS. China’s economic growth is predicted to decrease to 5.6 percent this year from 6.1 percent in 2019, which would reduce economic growth to an annual rate of 2.3 percent. This would be the slowest rate of economic growth since the global financial crisis from 2007 to 2009.

As a response, China’s leaders have proposed plans for the People's Bank of China to introduce a net 150 billion yuan ($21.7 billion) to markets in addition to other measures in an attempt to prevent volatility in financial markets.


Sources:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-01-27/tracking-the-virus-outbreak-s-impact-on-business-and-travel
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/02/03/business/economy/SARS-coronavirus-economic-impact-china.html
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-02-01/pboc-vows-to-maintain-ample-liquidity-amid-coronavirus-outbreak

$ocial $tatu$

Whether we want to admit it or not, all of us want to fit in to some extent. Especially in high school, when our levels of self-consciousness most likely reach their peak, standing out could be a nightmare. So we follow what everybody else is doing. Think about what is trending right now. Lululemon, HydroFlasks, the famously overpriced Urban Outfitters, Polaroid cameras, Uggs, etc., and these are just the basics. If we follow our impulses to keep up with all of these to "fit in," well...Karen's shirt in the picture above explains social status well: Bling Bling.

But who cares about popularity anyways, right? It's just 4 years of feeling a little like an outcast, wishing you had the courage to walk down the halls confidently. These were my thoughts before I knew that popularity has a long-term effect on people. 

It all starts with the obvious: confidence. Having your peers admire and respect you makes you feel worthy, like what you are doing matters. This confidence then builds up enough for these popular kids to take risks, especially because teens are prone to do so. When they get the result that they want, which is more "fame," this further boosts their ego. The cycle continues on.

All the confidence they built from this cycle is exactly the reason why, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research, people who were popular in high school earn 2% higher wages than those who were not. In my theory, people who were popular in high school may be able to take more risks. They can more efficiently judge whether they should take the risk or not because they are used to calculating the likelihood they will successfully pull it off, the magnitude of the effect of the success, and what they would lose if they fail. This may lead to more frequent promotions and overall recognition. 

If we loop this back around to high school, where we established in the beginning that keeping up with trends require a lot. of money, we can make the connection that the rich stay rich. People with money have flashy items that earn at least some recognition at school, which can make them popular. These kids gain confidence throughout high school, which leads to a more successful career.

This doesn't necessarily mean that only popular kids will succeed. The quiet kid sitting next to you in Calculus might be in the process of building her own company that may become the next Apple. We never know. But once again, doing that kind of stuff requires money, too, right?


Sources:
https://www.inc.com/maeghan-ouimet/high-school-popularity-affects-adult-income.html

We Spend How Much?

The average teen spends $2,600 a year. Thats about 52 starbucks coffees or 130 shirt or 43 pairs of shoes. The spending is up about 6% since fall and 1% since last year. After looking at my personal spending habits in class, I realized I spend a lot of money on what I would deem to be a "luxury item." By that I mean things that I do not need, but like to treat myself with. That could be anything from a boba tea or a manicure. I wanted to research the breakdown of how our generation spends.

Gender plays a tremendous role in how we spend money. Studies have found that male teenagers spend about 23% on food and 14% on video games. Thinking about it, as teenagers my parents did not have the ability to purchase the new Call of Duty or Grand Theft Auto Game that was released every year. These games and counsels are expensive. Technology plays a huge role in what we as teenagers choose to spend out money on.

Conversely, teen girls were more likely to shop for fashion. About 25% of their money was allotted to clothing - and in particular, shoes. With online shopping and instagram models/advertisements, new clothing items and brands are constantly being shown to teenagers. This constant ability to click a button and have shoes shipped to your front door allows for easy consumption of goods.

We are part of Generation Z - a generation which is estimated to spend a whopping $830 billion a year. But how do we get our money? Only 34% of teens in our generation have a job, compared to almost 60% of teens in 1979. This decrease is fairly large, and can be attributed to our ultra-stressful school schedule. With homework and pressure to participate in various extracurriculars from sports to volunteering, how are teens supposed to add a job on top of that - it is virtually impossible.

With the apparent increase in spending and decrease in teenagers with jobs arises a problem - teenagers are excessively taking money from their parents. There needs to be a way for teenagers to either balance their schoolwork and a job or minimize their spending. I am extremely busy during the school year so my solution is to get a job in the summer and save up for the school year. But, some people travel the whole summer of have an internship. What are some possible solutions for them?


Sources:

https://www.businessinsider.com/generation-z-teen-jobs-2018-5
https://www.valuepenguin.com/news/teen-spending-grows-making-gen-z-economic-force

Robots are Taking Over the World (ubi part 3)

Our world is becoming increasingly automated, with robots quickly becoming a part of our everyday lives. Although automation may seem like a good thing, it's important to note that it brings with it many other consequences on the economy.

Between 2000 and 2010, automation eliminated 6 million jobs from the manufacturing industry. Now, automation is on the rise again. A study by the McKinsey Institute finds that as many as 375 million workers globally will need to completely switch industries and learn a new set of skills in order to find new employment by the year 2030 because their previous positions will have been automated. Further, the McKinsey source writes that 47% of jobs in the United States are at risk of being automated by 2030.

What this new wave of automation teaches us is that the labor market is perpetually changing. When considering what industry to go into in the future, it's important to weigh the opportunity costs of automation as well. After all, it wouldn't make logical sense to study and begin work in an industry that will most likely be taken over by robots soon.

This results in labor-intense and busy work positions decreasing, as those are the jobs most likely to be automated. In fact, a common analysis finds that any mental task a human could complete in less than a second will most likely be automated in the future. As we as high school students near the time of our lives where we enter the job market, it's crucial to keep in mind the looming proximity of automation and how it will affect our jobs in the future.


https://qz.com/1140956/automation-may-require-as-many-as-375-million-people-to-find-new-jobs-by-2030/
https://medium.com/age-of-awareness/universal-basic-income-is-an-inevitable-part-of-our-automated-future-3cc181d4778d
https://www.smartdatacollective.com/7-jobs-humans-can-do-better-than-robots-and-ai/