• 16764_apples..11.22.11_000010813466XSmall

    An Apple’s Patent

    Nov 22 • Businesses, Demand, Supply, and Markets, Government, Innovation, Thinking Economically • 511 Views

    This apple has bites rather than bytes but like its namesake it was patented and took years to develop. When its U.S. patent expired in 2008, it had generated close to $6 million for the University of Minnesota and is still producing royalties in Europe.  With Google, the nicotine patch and the V-chip, it was even named one of 25 innovations that transformed the world.

    The name of this apple? The Honeycrisp.

    And now, the Honeycrisp has become a mother. You might enjoy reading about its offspring, the SweeTango in this PBS report and a New Yorker video and article by John Seabrook.

    The Economic Lesson

    Just like a new drug or chemical process, an apple undergoes R & D, gets intellectual property protection, generates royalties, and creates competition and knock-off concerns when its patent expires.

    Having taken 31 years to develop, the Honeycrisp’s royalty revenue stream is divided among its inventors, a fund for further research, and the department/college where the faculty developers worked.

    An Economic Question: Citing the Honeycrisp, explain why you agree or disagree with Edwin Mansfield (1930-1997) a University of Pennsylvania economist who said that seemingly small innovations can have a massive impact.

    No Comments on An Apple’s Patent

    Read More
  • Female Longevity

    Nov 22 • Gender Issues, Government, Households, Labor, Thinking Economically • 463 Views

    Reading that 90 year old women outnumber 90 year old men, I wondered about the policy implications.

    Women get more social security. No wonder Alan Simpson (gray “tigers” lady against simpson)

    No Comments on Female Longevity

    Read More
  • The US is again hitting its debt ceiling.

    If You Were the Supercommittee…

    Nov 21 • Behavioral Economics, Economic Debates, Government, Macroeconomic Measurement, Thinking Economically • 455 Views

    This simulation from Pew is a great way to understand what the supercommittee is trying to do. Called “the Pew Budget Challenge,” it presents close to 100 revenue and expenditure alternatives for bringing the debt down to 60% of GDP by 2021. You make the decisions and see where the debt goes.

    If you want more of an academic approach, this Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report explains budget controlling alternatives. I’ve noted below the CBO’s candidates for cuts and revenue boosts. Within each category, items are listed in descending size order.



    • Social Security
    • Medicare
    • Other
    • Medicaid and other Health Programs
    • Unemployment Compensation

    Defense Discretionary:

    • Operation and Maintenance
    • Military Personnel
    • Procurement
    • Other

    Nondefense Discretionary:

    • Other
    • Education, Training, Employment, Social Services
    • Transportation
    • Income Security
    • Health
    • Veterans
    • Justice
    • International Affairs


    (The CBO cites 35 ways to raise revenue in their report.)

    • Individual Income Taxes (42%)
    • Social Insurance Taxes (40%)
    • Other Revenue Sources (10%)
    • Corporate Income Taxes (9%)

    Called “Fiscal Commission Deja Vu,” this past econlife post looks at proposals from presidential budget commissions. The 2 commissions had similar proposals but the Congress and President never proceeded. And now, we await the supercommittee.

    The Economic Lesson

    Specifically defined, federal fiscal policy refers to taxing, spending, and borrowing. It involves the federal deficit which is the shortfall between annual spending and revenue. The federal debt is the total amount that the U.S. government owes.

    An Economic Question: In the Pew simulation, how much could you cut the growth of the debt?

    No Comments on If You Were the Supercommittee…

    Read More
  • 16760_3.24_000011088049XSmall

    California and Kentucky

    Nov 20 • Economic Debates, Government, International Trade and Finance, Macroeconomic Measurement, Money and Monetary Policy, Thinking Economically • 492 Views

    Could we compare California’s relationship with Kentucky to Germany and Greece?

    Somewhat like Germany and Greece…

    • California and Kentucky share the same currency.
    • California has a more vibrant economy than Kentucky’s.
    • Workers in California earn more than workers in Kentucky.

    And yet, even though they are more productive and more affluent, California residents do not complain that a higher proportion of Kentucky’s residents receive Medicare and Medicaid funds. 

    Could we say that we in the US comfortably support “have” states’ taxes going to the “have-not” states while German citizens resist similar support for Greece? The parallel is inexact but it is interesting to contemplate.

    The Economic Lesson

    Now, as we try to diminish our deficit, the issue of redistribution resurfaces. Taking money from one group and using it for another, taxation redistributes income. Also though, by spending less, we are making a statement about redistribution.

    An Economic Question: Specifically noting “from” and “to,” how might different kinds of taxes redistribute income?

    The idea for today’s post came from this blog. Please do note that contrary to what that blog implies, California has a higher unemployment rate than Kentucky.

    No Comments on California and Kentucky

    Read More
  • 16758_7.19_000006524235XSmall

    Stagnation or Education?

    Nov 19 • Businesses, Demand, Supply, and Markets, Economic Debates, Government, Households, Innovation, Labor, Macroeconomic Measurement, Regulation, Thinking Economically • 506 Views

    Is the problem stagnation or education?

    For George Mason economist Tyler Cowen, it was all about his grandmother. Debating MIT economist Erik Brynjolfsson, Cowen reminded us that a long list of innovations including cars, antibiotics and refrigerators revolutionized his grandmother’s life. More recently? As he says in his book, The Great Stagnation, relatively little has changed. His conclusion? Stagnation is our problem.

    Disagreeing, Brynjolfsson specifically cites his brother’s heart transplant and the digital technologies that are transforming the workplace. In his book, Race Against The Machine, he takes us to the 3 gaps that are leaving many people behind: 1) higher skilled/lower-skilled workers; 2) superstars/everyone else; 3) capital/labor. His conclusion? Education is our problem.

    The Cowen/Brynjolfsson half hour debate is great to watch and for $3.99 each, you can download their books here and here.

    The Economic Lesson

    As a factor of production, capital can be divided into 2 categories.

    • Physical capital: The machines, buildings, and inventory that make labor more productive.
    • Human capital: The education that make labor more productive

    While both economists’ ideas intersect, we could conclude that Cowen is saying we need more innovative physical capital while Brynjolfsson is emphasizing how human capital needs to change.

    An Economic Question: How does the following relate to the Cowen/Brynjolfsson debate and economic growth? Defining the problem shapes the solution.

    No Comments on Stagnation or Education?

    Read More