Monday, November 28, 2011

The Economics of Thanksgiving

Gobble-Gobble:  Choosing the Perfect Turkey 
            In preparation for this year’s celebratory feast of gratitude, the first thing on the “King Checklist” was the turkey—a decision that required a meticulous cost-benefit analysis.
            Basically, it came down to two choices of meats.  The first—a cheaper turkey my family has bought for the past five consecutive holidays—seemed the favorite.  Because of the lower price, monetary value could be allocated elsewhere, like towards scrumptious pumpkin pie.  However, the second option—an expensive, pre-ordered turkey—still held weight.  As my father always says, “Quality holds its own benefit”.  Price aside, the latter bird offered a much higher utility.
            Utilizing the power of economics, my family decided to go with the organic turkey because of the greater satisfaction it presented.  The deliberative process was rough, but the ultimate decision proved deliciously worthwhile!

The Law of Cheese and Crackers
            After watching the Macy’s Day Parade, it is customary for my family to nibble on a small snack before the big dinner.  This quick food has varied over the span of many Thanksgivings.  It just so happens that this year’s appetizer was heavily influenced by the law of demand.
            In the search for a delectable snack, my mother came across the bargain section.  Naturally, price reductions were galore.  Locating a cheese and crackers package on sale, my mother swiftly bought five of them.  Her action is in accordance with the aforementioned law, showing that a decrease in price leads to an increase in overall demand.
            The copious amount of dairy products still left over is a testament to fiscal theory.

Ocean Spray Cranberry Sauce?  I Think Not.
            It happens annually.  Every Turkey Day, one way or another, a catastrophe occurs.  This year’s abominable conflagration turned out to be the overlooked purchase of cranberry sauce.  But have no fear.  I was assigned the task of solving this conflict.
            Packing a recently-baked roll into my mouth, I grabbed my keys and drove to the nearest open supermarket.  Intent on my objective, I hastily found my way to the correct food aisle.  Planning on taking an Ocean Spray brand can, I grabbed one and started heading towards the nearby checkout line.  Yet, during that quick time lapse, I discern a glimpse of the price—a 30% increase than what it normally is!
            Contemplating the situation, elasticity comes to mind.  Due to the fact that multiple substitutes exist, I decided to not buy the Ocean Spray product.  Being an elastic good, I decide to purchase a much more comfortably priced brand of cranberry sauce.  The high elasticity made it easy for me not to conform to such a drastic price change.
            That’s one more thing to be thankful for: cranberry sauce is not inelastic!

Stuffed of Stuffing
            For me, the highlight of the Thanksgiving dinner is the stuffing, my mother’s personal specialty.  The other cuisine is certainly nice, but it’s the stuffing that drives my love for the holiday.  As such, I eat multiple servings.
            My feasting starts off in complete jubilance.  With each bite, I feel more and more satisfied.  There seems to be no end to the joy I receive from gobbling down an abundance of buttery goodness.  But of course, the inevitable law of diminishing marginal utility eventually surfaces.  There comes a point of eating where the more I eat, the less satiated I feel.  When the stuffing becomes painful to down, I know it’s time to step back and let my stomach convalesce. 
            Like any product in the economic world, increased intake of stuffing inexorably becomes burdensome and ineffective.  Therefore, it is very beneficial to know one’s limits.  Especially when it comes to food!

Black Friday Shopping
            The day after Thanksgiving, I headed to Wal-Mart to get a head start on Christmas shopping for my two sisters.  The alluring thought of Black Friday deals lessening damage to my wallet brought me in speedy time.
            The problem was, however, what I should buy for them.  For the longest time, I have not had a clue what the female sector of the population enjoys receiving as gifts.  From past experience, clothes and jewelry seem to do the trick (I think).  And so, knowing I could care less about which amount of each good I bought, I plotted an indifference curve.  Factoring in my scant budget line, I was able to deduce my optimal consumption bundle for clothes and jewelry for my sisters using that graph.
            Even with taxation, I ensured I got a great deal on the busiest shopping day of the winter season because of the dropped prices.  Mastery of indifference curves really does come in handy!


Sunday, November 13, 2011

Wikitroubles

Many thought it impossible, but Wikipedia, a non-profit public information-sharing site that allows anyone to edit its content, has become a major Internet power.  It’s the world’s fifth-biggest website, with 400 million visitors every month.  In order to maintain itself, the online encyclopedia needs its user’s money and volunteer’s time.  Surprisingly, the former is the easier task.
When the founder of Wikipedia, Jimmy Wales, beseeched users to help pay for piling bills, the site reached its target of $16 million in just 50 days.  The majority of donations stem from either rich individuals or affluent companies who admire the site’s unrestricted access and equitable mantra.  The extraordinary increase in demand for a database of variant knowledge feeds customer appreciation.  That said, consumer surplus is considerably high. Though such large monetary sums are nice, Wales would much rather prefer funding to come from large numbers of happy, average-income users; a stable alternative representative of a content constituency of Wikifans.  Besides the fact that Wikipedia can fundraise with relative fluidity, not much capital is actually needed.  The site has just 78 full time staff and 370 servers, compared to a staggering 60,000 for Facebook and over 1 million for Google.  Also, it spends 44% of proceeds on technology, with administration costs just making up a quarter.  It doesn’t accept any advertising.
As for “raising time”, the task is much more tedious.  Month-on-month article growth in the English Wikipedia was as high as 5% in 2006 but has obstinately stayed at 1% for the past two years.  Even worse, Wikipedia fears that without immediate action, the number of active editors will decline below 80,000 by next year.  The scarcity of editors makes for an exiguous amount of content production.  Says Wikipedia’s chief global development officer, “90% of users outside of Wikipedia’s ‘core community’ aren’t even aware they can edit the encyclopedia”.  Users seem to ignore the plentiful invitations to get involved, limiting potential growth in total utility.
Wikipedia presents a unique economic conundrum.  In order for the “customers” of Wikipedia to get the most out of the site they know and love, they are going to have to become actively involved the back-breaking process of editing and revision.  Payment is augmentation.
(Information taken from “Free but not easy”, The Economist November 11th 2011)

Sunday, November 6, 2011

A Surge in Insurance

The future of Barrack Obama’s healthcare bill is relatively ambiguous.  Its main provisions will activate until 2014.  Until then, the Supreme Court may hastily strike it down or Congress may enact serious legislative restraints. However, even though the law has yet to take effect, implicit repercussions are already occurring, especially in the insurance field.  It is the latest deal to extend insurers’ grip into new areas of healthcare.
Normally speaking, insurers “protect margins by micromanaging claims and hiking premiums”, leading to perverse incentives for high quantity, low quality procedures.  Thus, from 2014, the law will require everyone to buy health insurance and offer subsidiaries to those who cannot afford it. As more people purchase insurance, “firms’ revenue will more than double to $1.2 trillion by 2019”.  Yet, profits will be squeezed thanks to a new tax, a minimum standard for benefits and new scrutiny of increases in premiums.  With this in mind, insurers are keen to diversify.  Like Aetna and other major healthcare insurance companies, many are hedging against a volatile private market by turning to the public one, like Medicare Advantage. 
Moreover, insurers are spreading to new businesses.  This past year, Aetna bought an information technology requirement.  Humana recently purchased a chain of clinics.  For the UnitedHealth Group , two non-insurance subsidiaries already “account for 20% of its $94 billion annual revenue”.  In all these companies, the concept of marginal analysis is being applied because the costs and benefits are weighed for each additional acquired supplemental business.  That said, historically, insurers have derisively fought with hospitals over payments.  But now, with more insurers interlinking with small, non-insurance companies and an increased demand for pay-for-performance contracts, the interests of insurer’s may finally be aligning with those of its former enemies.

(Information taken from “The Doctor Octopus”, The Economist October 29th 2011)