Trade Deficient - Oppurtunity Cost (October 28th, 2011)

What does "Made in China" mean?

• It makes up 2.7% of US consumer spending.
•  Only 1.2% reflects that cost of the imported goods.
• The U.S. content of "made of china" is about 55%.

It is all based on oppurtunity cost.
If the trade deficit should be true, then the trade surpass should make more jobs? Actually, no. Agriculture jobs have declined.
Why doesn't trade deficient destroy jobs?

1. The identity: You pay with your imports for your exports.
2. When you specialize, you get richer: Income Effect.

Round about ways:

• He lectures, gets money, pays for food, paying Wegmans.
• A list of factors are plausible to impact the trade.
• It allows trade to be plausible.

That frees up their budget (overtime the impact of income for food was changed and has freed up.)
But what is the trade deficient? What we spoke about is the trade account or current account?
USA buys assets: Capital account balance has skyrocketed on surplus. People have been buying shares and entrepreneurs buying buildings.
So long as we maintain attractive to foreign countries, we will remain strong.

By tearing a dollar, you are committing a felony. You hurt the American economy. No matter what, as long as you take the dollar way, the United States will always get it right back, which is good but it is also a good thing based on trade deficit.

Trade Statistics (October 26, 2011)

1) "We aren't getting better jobs from losing the poor one."
The people who would lose their jobs due to mechs. There is a small portion of those people who will not be a bad time because the United States allows trade. Remember, self sufficiency is make us poorer.
Trade adjustments have not been able to sustain training future possible jobs, such as a windmill technicians. Instead they were hit with solar energy technician where they can't use their skills.
If jobs are opportunity of being out busted, then the wage will definitely be increasing.
Technology is not a part of why we stop losing jobs because they all benefit us. Trade is more of a reason why people don't have their jobs.
The economy shifts to the skills that we retain in school. It is not fixed so everyone will have a job but the offering is still there. Job opportunities shall always be there for us to choose.
Trade statistics are MEANINGLESS!
From the people who work with mechs in factories now, only 9% are part of manufacturing jobs in 2009.
3) Manufacturing outputs produced more things now than we have ever have before, even China. So is America being "hollowed out" is bullshit.
Shouldn't "the economy" put people ahead in profits? It does!

• 1985: USA ATMS: 60,000 ATMS and 48,500 Tellers
• 2002: USA has 352,000 ATMS and 527,000 tellers.

ATMs compliment it instead of replace workers. It is debatable on what technology can do since it can compliments or help produce faster.
Via Tan Fietcher: Manufacturing is low, but as an economist he never mentioned why it is a bad thing. He also discusses that if society cuts in consumption, but the efficient will and shall not fall. He is incorrect.

EWOT: Comparative Roommates

Lately, I tried to take the idea of two different entities and comparing how they help one another to allow a economic sustainability. Well, in my own room, I started to think about how I sustain both me and my roommate with equal trades. Although it sounds boring, I love water (and liquor) but mostly water. I could drink water over anything and it's hard to live in the Quad without a water fountain nearby to refill a water bottle. So now every three days or so, I buy 3 Liters of water for $2.50. Normally I would drink it on my own but I also feel the need to give some to my roommate since he too would like to quench his thirst. But lately, I've been getting somewhat annoyed that he receives the water for free. So a couple of days ago, I decided that every time I would buy the 3 Liter water bottle and he wanted some to drink, he would have to do two problems of Webwork. Normally it takes about 5 to 10 minutes to finish the problems but if he is capable of doing it, he'll be able to gain access to the water. Since he does not have enough declining left, I think it would be somewhat worth it to do two problems that I have a hard time doing for the access of good quality water in comparison to fountain water, (it tastes like iron) and Wilson Common water, (it's a pain walking back to a cup of water.) Now I have less time to work on the Webwork since I take 15 to 20 minutes to do 2 problems and he has access to water that I bring on my own during the week.

Castrating Animals, Long Live Roquefort, and Rolling Cigars

What Mike Rowe in his conference had also got to me as well. Right now, I'm a student studying at a private college for a dream of being a Chemical Engineer. Yet I acknowledge those who are studying liberal arts to be some kind of a joke. Even more so, those who don't even try to attend college. It is not predominately a bad choice to continue getting an education because of the harsh difficulty of getting a job in the United States. But what I also realized is how we under appreciate those who do things that not only make them happy but also allow us to live easier lifestyles. The presumption of living a dream is interesting to me. We all work hard to do what we want to do but never take a step back and allow ourselves to see if that truly brings happiness upon ourselves. Just like the article of rolling cigars, we don't always choose what we want to do with life, we sometimes allow our passion take us to where we want. We allow society to predestine our roles sometimes and never identify for ourselves where we would like to pursue. The same goes for the Roquefort where she said that it would be difficult to get Roquefort for our the customers but it would also be difficult to allow for us to have a choice. We would allow our government to make the choices for us and not allow what we desire to make those choices in the long run. Restrictions and containment; they both suck.

Comparative Advantage (October 24th, 2011)

(Drawn graphs of Rochester and Cornell: Rochester makes 10 glasses of wine and 5 cameras, where as Cornell makes 3 glasses of win and 4 cameras.)

Rochester students have an absolute advantage at making cameras and wines. But which of these two universities make it efficient? What is the sacrifice?

Rochester makes 5 cameras for the cost of 10 wine bottles. It costs them 10 wine bottles to make 5 cameras. Therefore, the price of the camera is $2 worth of wine and the price of the wine is $0.50 worth of a camera.

Cornell makes 4 cameras for the cost of 3 wine bottles. They can also make 1 camera for the cost of 3/4th's of a wine bottle. Therefore, the price of a camera is $3/4th the worth of a wine bottle and the price of a wine bottle is $4/3rd worth of a camera.

• Rochester has a "comparative advantage" in making wine over Cornell.
• Comparative Advantage is the ability to produce something without as much of a sacrifice as the other place. What is made is made efficient and cheap in comparison to someone else.
• Nobody can have a comparative advantage over everyone. 

If Rochester initially made 10 wine bottles and 0 cameras and Cornell made 0 wine bottles and 4 cameras and they decided to trade 3 of each, such that Rochester gained 3 cameras from Cornell and Cornell gained 3 wine bottles from Rochester.
Then the final product will be 7 wine bottles and 3 cameras for Rochester and 3 wine bottles and 1 camera for Cornell.

This creates a change in the graph known as the PPF ( Production Possibility Frontier).
Economical sustainability from retaining more of an output. You can pay for your exports with your iimports always!

Individuals are the entities and should not be grouped with vague statements (Rochester is in western New York, so Western New York is good at making wine.) That statement is incorrect.

Failures

1. There is self-sufficiency, which is the road to poverty.
2. Function of productivity in each country, such as the United States and China.
3. Policies that restrict people from trading will make people poorer.

The Boosting Outputs

1.  Workers have been replaed by techonology.
2. What we import today is technologically heavy.
3. High school jobs stay and shall allow jobs to leave the area.
4. The jobs are more pleasent than what it was before.
5. We have lots of skilled laborers.

Property Rights

From the notes posted from Rizzo's lecture, I believe Property Rights is a moral enduing system that is based upon others payment for ownership. It's understandable to note that if someone is making a payment for said set of land that they should do anything with hat set of land that will not conflict with illegal activities. It is also understandable that you have the right to remove those who are on your land or disobey the orders placed on that set of land because it is obviously yours. Private property falls into that category. But I also believe it is based on a moral system throughout society. For example, kids would not try to play on people's lawns because they know that the owner would have them get in trouble no matter how much fun they are having. But what I was also thinking about was when someone decides to put their stuff on a chair beside them to save the space for their friends. Their friend did not pay for the chair so why do we feel the need to find another seat when such predicament comes? What if you leave your own bag to try to do something and end up coming back to the seat being taken away? Based on property rights, is it wrong to take the seat or is it wrong to move the bag? If moving the bag is violating private property, is the seat also an extension of the private property?

EWOT: The Homeless Subway

This week I was thinking about what Rizzo said in one of his lectures about paying to have someone get removed from your side. He then mentioned that how rare it would have been for someone to pay a homeless person to step out of his seat and leave the presence of the giver. In the act of kindness, why don't we apply the same thing to those who play music in the Subway? Although they don't disperse our presence, they certainly are annoy us in a small way. Especially when you're trying to have a conversation with a friend that you are wanting to catch up with and suddenly you're rudely interrupted by a mariachi band or a guy playing the drums. I would make the effort to not only pay them but to tell them never to play on the train again because I know that I'm not the only one feeling that way. Not to stutter confusion but I want the application of giving money not only to be somewhat of a gift to them for begging but a statement from society that we would rather have you play elsewhere less disruptive and where we will not feel wrong for not assisting them from their past failures.