How do Tech Companies Influence Society with their Products?

Source: Tech Influence

     Today there are five tech giants that include Facebook, Google, Amazon, Apple, and Twitter. These companies are having a growing influence on how society thinks about hot button political issues and other things in daily life.  The Guardian argues that these companies are too powerful because their secretive products have the ability to influence millions of people's political and educational decisions. 

 For example Google has been accused by the President and other people of rigging search results to a more left wing political view. Which is a scary thing because this means a single company has a huge influence over American elections. What people research will a lot of the time determine the way they vote and if you have a company rigging search results to favor a certain party our democracy is at stake. But according to the Guardian, there is no way to confirm this because of how secret Google’s search algorithms are, and they also constantly change they so it would be really hard to actually prove this so for now it in just speculation.

        These companies also only work towards their agenda, for example Apple and Google have lobbied very hard to get their products in schools to help students learn or so they say, according to a Washington Post article kids actually have a much harder time learning material from computers because a lot of teachers not all but a lot think they can just assign work on the computer and their work is done. They don’t actually teach anything after they assign this work and kids are just left more confused. The leaders of these companies know this too, according to a Matt Richel of the New York Times of people who are executives of Silicon Valley companies send their children to the Waldorf school that does not allow technology they only allow paper and pencil learning. The heads of these companies preached that technology is the savior of American Education that will make kids so much smarter when they know that is a lie. They don’t even allow their own children to be exposed to technology in school. They changed American society form pencil and paper to all computers not because it in beneficial but so they can sell more products.

Future Research Question: 

Is it Better to Live On-Campus or Off-Campus?

Source: TIME 

The economic principle I’m exploring is because of scarcity, people choose. All choices have an opportunity cost.

My research question to help me study the economic principle is “Is it Better to Live On-Campus or Off-Campus?" The article published in Investopedia titled “Living on Campus: Valuable or a Ripoff?” explains that the decision to live on campus or off campus is one of the biggest choices new students make. Many four-year degree program colleges require enrolled students to live on-campus for a certain amount of time but there are some exceptions when schools have this rule. There is no right or wrong choice, but different students prefer different living environments.

The article proves my economic principle by arguing that when deciding whether to live in a dorm or off-campus you should consider: costs (rent, food, etc.) and proximity to college activities. 

First, although “off-campus rents may be cheaper than the price of room and board at school, rent rarely provides the range of services that a school offers.” Living on-campus eliminates the need for extra costs like food, furniture, electricity, gas, water, cable, and internet. One downside to on-campus housing that is worth mention is that students can face many different fees for infractions like noise complaints or damages to walls that are fairly minor issues when living off campus.

Second, there are many considerations when choosing campus options. According to Investopedia: “living away from the school does cut one off from the campus social life and social networking possibilities,” which can be necessary for creating a college experience. Because many students can’t handle the responsibilities that come with living alone for the first time, colleges may require on-campus residency. I could see this happening to many people including myself, and from my own experience, it seems like students are better off living on-campus rather than off-campus.

In my next blog post, I will research the question: “Should College Students Participate in Athletics?”

Should College Students Pursue Jobs or Internships?

Source: Internal Data Resources

The economic principle I’m exploring is because of scarcity, people choose. All choices have an opportunity cost. My research question to help me study the economic principle is “Should college students pursue jobs or internships?" 

The article “How Valuable Are Internships To College Students' Future Careers” published by Forbes demonstrates this economic principle by arguing/showing that there are many employment options but some will provide more benefit than others. 

First, it is important to know that when considering work opportunities, students should set financial goals and plan for the future by making decisions that better prepare themselves for relevant careers. Employment can be highly-competitive and participating in jobs and internships can greatly improve students’ chances of being hired. Having job and internship experience relevant to your field shows employers your seriousness in pursuing your career and demonstrates focus and commitment. 

Second, jobs and internships allow students to fully grasp what entering certain career fields can be like. They give students a chance to pursue their interests on a no-commitment basis. It is unconventional for a student to start participating in full-time professional work without having first experienced introductory level work within the same field. I wouldn't want to be thrown into a full-time work in a career field that I am uninterested in. It is reassuring to know that there endless work opportunities all of which are guaranteed to diversify abilities and interests. 

Third, all work, paid or not, will provide benefits to students. Jobs and internships almost always stimulate personal growth. Not everyone holds employment for the same reasons; some people utilize work opportunities for money while others utilize them for learning and experience for future careers. This article states that “in the end, the one thing you absolutely cannot afford to do is nothing.” This emphasizes that no one will gain competitive advantages without putting in the work. I believe that as long as students are working hard to engage with the world, they will find success.

In my next post, I will research the question: "Is it Better to Live On-Campus or Off-Campus?"

Pay-to-Win tactics in video games

Principle: People generally respond to incentives in predictable ways. Question: How do companies use pay-to-win tactics to get people to buy microtransactions.

 Pay-to-win tactics have become fairly infamous in the gaming community, as they are systems that are designed to give advantages to players who spend extra money (more than the initial price for the game) for extra advantages while playing against other players. Tactics that use microtransactions and in-game purchases are usually reserved for free-to-play games, where the game is initially free, and the payments are usually for exclusive items, access to more of the game, or cosmetic items that have no real effect on gameplay. These systems are both widespread and generally accepted. However, company’s can receive backlash if the system becomes exploitative. The most hated of these systems usually allow players to buy advantages over others players in multiplayer modes. Recently, gamers have become increasingly angry at giant publishers like EA who, in games that already cost full price and have more expensive “Advanced” editions, are implementing and ramping these systems up to 11.

One of the tactics publishers use is offering “lootboxes”, which gives you an item of differing value based on a percentage chance. Lootboxes can be highly exploitative because the percentage chance of specific items dropping from the boxes aren't always made public, and can be immensely low, like in EA’s FIFA Ultimate Team. Because of recent gamer and international backlash to the use of “lootboxes” in multiplayer games like Battlefront II (a Star Wars First Person Shooter) and FIFA Ultimate Team, the Australian Environment and Communications Reference Committee (ECRC) surveyed more than 7,400 gamers to determine responses to “chance-based” items like loot boxes. The study determined that lootboxes and the way they are used is “psychologically akin to gambling.”

https://www.windowscentral.com/fifa-19-ultimate-team-card-pack-odds-revealed-and-theyre-not-great
https://www.extremetech.com/gaming/277317-study-loot-boxes-are-psychologically-akin-to-gambling

Do certain positions in football effect on how long of a career a player can have?

Reddit

In the article "Brain damage from football concussions varies by position and career duration" talks about what positions have the biggest effect on players. Also how certain positions are more dangerous than others, and that people think the opposite about what position in football are the most dangerous.

 Players that have shorter careers play offensive of line and defense of line. These types of positions are called “Non-speed players with a history of recurrent concussions had more damage to white matter and less brain activity during memory exercises, the study found.” This shows that constant slamming to the head is more deadly to a person than a single huge hit to the head. Overall Linemen on both side of the ball have a higher chance of brain damage in the future.

 With this linemen in college and the NFL have more frequent concussions, than speed players. Because not only are they getting their heads smashed together, but they are smashing face to face with each other. That causes more damage to the brain. Also “Constant banging of heads in the non-speed positions might be just as dangerous as a few higher-speed type collisions that occur at the speed positions,” This explains why linemen on both sides of the ball have a shorter football career, and have future problems.

With this people don't know that a linemen is the most dangerous position to play. NFL players don't realize how their lives will be later on in life because their life is great. They don't realize all the problems they will have because they are living the dream, making millions, being on national TV every week. Football players in the NFL will regret their past once they realize what they have done to them-self and the problems they will have to live with in life.

How is a NFL players life after they retire from football?

What is the DISCLOSE Act?

                                                           Source: Huffington Post



The article published in The Hill titled “Congress can Protect Midterm Elections with DISCLOSE" demonstrates this economic principle by showing what steps Senators are currently taking to reform campaign finance and what implications it could have. Although the DISCLOSE Act brings more transparency to candidates funding,  I believe does not do enough to change key problems with current campaign finance laws because it doesn't address how much PACS can receive or force them to disclose their sources.

 One step that is currently being taken to reform campaign finance is the DISCLOSE Act which was proposed by Senator Chuck Schumer in 2012. Though introduced in 2012, the act has recently gained more attention as more members of congress are concerned about foreign influence in elections, even more sense there was possible collusion between the Trump Campaign and Russia. The DISCLOSE Act proposes three major changes to campaign finance law. The first change is to require organizations who spend $10,000 on ads must release after the donation is processed, this would make candidates more transparent to voters as they are deciding who to elect. Secondly, all US companies who have strong foreign interests are not allowed to contribute to campaigns as that could lead to a foreign power influencing U.S. politics, an already large problem in the minds of Americans.

 Some of the main arguments in support of the DISCLOSE Act is how it will restore America's confidence in politicians and elections as well. Sponsor of this act, Senator Schumer believes that the American people have lost faith in elections and politicians since the controversial election of George W Bush in 2000 and allegations of collusion between the Trump campaign and Russia have only heightened these fears. In addition to the immediate disclosure of campaign donors, the prevention of foreign influenced companies donating to campaigns also relieves the fears of the public in terms of their democracy being threatened by international interests. Finally, real time donation lists keep the electorate more informed and thus can help shape stronger political decisions that voters won’t regret after Election Day when donor lists are often released.

 There are also many opposed to the DISCLOSE Act who argue it is dangerous for democracy and doesn’t address the key problem with campaign finance law. First some argue that preventing American companies from donating even though they have strong foreign interest disenfranchises them from the political process and restricts their ability to use their profits as they see fit. To simply state it many believe that the government has no right to restrict how companies choose to spend their money. Secondly, the biggest issue with campaign finance law is the ability of PACS to donate unlimited amounts of money, not the people who make donations. PACS are able to donate unlimited amounts to campaigns as long as the funds are deemed as a “party building measure” rather than a campaign donation. Those opposed to the DISCLOSE act argue that any form of campaign finance reform should address this issue and be the forefront of the bill.

I agree with this point because while the DISCLOSE act does good in limiting outside influences and promotes transparency, PACS need to be regulated in campaign finance and I believe that this issue is more important than the ones the DISCLOSE Act address. Also,  the DISCLOSE Act should limit the amount of money PACS can take in order for the law to be effective.

In my next blog post I will research the question: What repercussions could arise from changing campaign finance law?

What Makes Innovations Fail

What Makes Innovations Fail

PhilMcKinney

Since companies only have a limited amount of resources to spend on innovations, they want to be successful while using the least amount of resources possible. Companies must not only look at what will make the innovation successful but what might make the innovation fail. Of course, this is easier said than done. No one can predict the future or what consumers will do perfectly, as a result more than 90% of new products fail according to "Why Most Innovations are Great Big Failures". There are some things, however, that companies can do to attempt to predict whether an innovation will fail. Looking at innovation failures and investigating what traits made them fail. 

The most common trait that causes innovation to fail according to the article "Why Innovation Fails" is companies focusing solely on "bringing their new product ideas to life". This may not sound like a bad thing, however when all the company worries about is the new aspect or innovation of the product they forget about consumer needs and then create a product that no ones wants. Innovators also need to explore the consumer needs and empathize with the consumer. Seeing the customer's perspective, by putting them self in the customers shoes, helps to mitigate some of the common mistakes that cause innovation flops.

Companies must also look at how they are going to implement their innovation into the real world. In the article, "Why Most Innovations are Great Big Failures", Google Wallet is used as an example of a good idea that was executed well leading to its failure. Google Wallet is an innovation that would simplify paying by putting your money and credit cards into your mobile device. Google did not take into account all the external factors, businesses needed new technology to accept this form of payment, their were new security issues created, other phone companies didn't support the service as it was seen as competition. Even though the innovation itself was a great idea it wasn't executed properly or effectively leading to its failure.

Future Research Question: How competition affects innovation? 

What will happen after car companies start to go electric?

CSP Daily News

The economic principle I’m exploring is “Because of scarcity, people choose. All choices have an opportunity cost”.

My research question to help me study the economic principle is “How does going electric affect a car company?”

 The article published in Inform Blog titled “The impact of electric vehicles on automotive logistics” demonstrates this economic principle by showing that going electric affects part suppliers, there must be an increase in safety and handling requirements, and there must be an increase in charging stations. 

First, going electric affects part suppliers. For decades, car companies have been using the combustion engine. This engine consists of about 1,200 different parts. However, in new electric engines, there are only about 20 parts. I believe this will lead to the fall of many part suppliers as exhaust systems, pistons, cooling systems, etc. will no longer be needed. Instead, new companies that produce, for example, batteries will rise to the top.

Second, there will be an increase in safety and handling requirements. For automakers, it will raise the question of should the company make components in house or buy them? I believe this will be a growing problem as batteries require complex, high quality chemical equations that most companies aren’t capable of. This is where chemical engineers come in. With chemical equations being necessary, there will be an increase in jobs for these engineers because without them, research and development would come to a halt.

Third, there must be an increase in charging stations. Just like normal combustion engine cars, electric cars need to “refuel” in a way. Instead of having gas stations, car companies must hope for the fact that there will be an increase in the amount of charging stations. Because without them, their cars would not function. This will lead to new job opportunities as charging stations would require an investment and labor to build them. I believe charging stations could be the answer to many unemployment problems. 

In my next blog post I will research the question: Can Earth afford for car companies to go electric?

Teslas Control Over Their Vehicles

SOURCE: WIKI

The economic principle I’m exploring is "Because of scarcity, people choose. All choices have an opportunity cost." The article, "Tesla Boosts Car Battery Power During Irma, Raising Questions of Control” written by Tiffany Hsu in September 2017 demonstrates the economic principle that all choices have an opportunity. Specifically, How does Tesla go about controlling their vehicles over the air, through software updates and what is possible with this technology. 

 My research question to help me study the economic principle is “ What Is Tesla's control over their cars and the batteries.” The article published in The New York Times titled “Tesla Boosts Car Battery Power During Irma, Raising Questions of Control” demonstrates this economic principle by showing how Tesla can have some control over their vehicles over the air.

 During Hurricane Irma in Florida many residents had to evacuate quickly. There were lines and lines of cars to fill up for gas at the gas stations, but for the people who own Teslas it was a bit harder. Teslas run off battery power and take about an hour to get a full charge on the superchargers. If your trying to escape out of town waiting an hour for your car to charge isn’t the most ideal situation. During the Hurricane Tesla was able to give their vehicles an extra 30 miles of range over the air. They were able to do this because their cars had a battery capacity of 75 kilowatts , but they used software to limit the car's battery to 60 kilowatts.

 Tesla has since stopped limiting their cars battery capacity through software. This does show that Tesla can change almost anything to their cars with something as simple as an update. All of their vehicles have a touch screen display that house all of the cars functionality. They can make changes to their autopilot system, which allows the car to semi drive by itself. Tesla's cars will get better with time and consumers will be able to own Teslas longer than most other cars, because of the company being able to send updates at any time.

 In my next blog post I will research the question: How does Tesla deal with Battery Heat in their Cars.

670 Mile Battery Range Set In Tesla.

SOURCE: Tesla

The economic principle I’m exploring is "Because of scarcity, people choose. All choices have an opportunity cost."  "The article, "New 670 Mile Tesla Range Set” " written by James Gilboy in August 2017 demonstrates the economic principle that all choices have an opportunity. Specifically, Tesla could make batteries with more range but it isn't Tesla's priority at the moment; they are using their scarce resources to meet production quotas.

 The Tesla Model S comes with a range of 335 miles on a single charge. In a recently done test it was found that a Model S P100d was able to travel for over 600 miles in a closed circuit. This was done by Hypermiling. Hypermiling is using driving techniques to improve fuel efficiency in car or in this case a Tesla. Peak effeicenty for the car is achieved around 40 kph or about 24mph. The people who ran the test drove around for 28 hours before the battery ran out of juice.

 This is a major achievement for electric cars. It shows that it is possible to reach a range well over 600 miles. Most cars only have fuel tanks big enough to go 300-400 miles. With technology improving every day and new discoveries being made, Tesla may soon be able to implement newer and longer lasting batteries into their vehicles, their recent announcement of their 2020 Roadster claims it can go 620 miles on a single charge. If Tesla can pull this off it will be a huge achievement in the electric car industry.

 In my next blog post I will research the question: To what extent does Tesla have control over their cars and the batteries even after they're sold?

Have You Ever Played The Let's Pretend Game?

Source: https://fyi.uwex.edu

The economic principle I will be exploring is: Institutions are the “rules of the game” that influence choices. My research question to help me study this principle is “How does the “let’s pretend game” influence students utility and incentives in school?”  Neil Postman writes about curriculum in his article “Teaching as a Subversive Activity” and he explains how kids play the “let’s pretend game” to get their way through curriculum that often is not relevant to them or the real world. 

 First, Postman starts off by saying that most of the questions, tests/quizzes, homework etc. that you feel you need to do well on in school are things you don’t actually want to learn, but you feel you have to pretend to care about what you are learning when really it’s just about the grade. He goes on to give some examples that I found very true. He shares  examples of this such as “Let’s pretend that what bores you is important, and that the more you are bored, the more important it is.” or “Let’s pretend that your intellectual competence can be judged on the basis of how well you can play the Let’s pretend game.”

This explains that your utility is put to the side to learn things you have to pretend to enjoy. This game of pretending gives you incentives to act like you care about all of your subjects when actually you might just be interested in one or two. This is something I see all the time. Kids are constantly pretending to care about everything they are learning to get a good grade. I know for me that I don’t enjoy History but I pretend to like it so that I can get a good grade.

Second, Postman shares 14 things that school doesn't teach by James Agee. A couple I found interesting are “on the curriculum: I discovered that there is… c) no attempt to clarify psychological situations in the individual, in his family, or in his world.” and he also mentions “...g) no attempts beyond the most nominal and stifling to awaken, to protect, or to guide the sense of investigation, the sense of joy, the sense of beauty.” So rather than learning life lessons we learn things that might not interest us but we have to, so we pretend to care. I personally think that there should be a Mental Health everyone is required to take their senior year.

Third, Postman’s overall reason for writing this article is to show his readers the things students have to learn v.s things they should be taught. He uses the “Let’s pretend game” to show that the things we have to learn are things we have to pretend to enjoy to get through it and get a good grade. He also uses it to show that you’re taught to learn things in school because they are “important” when in reality you might not really be interested in it. The things that are important in school are your happiness/utility and your incentives.

 In my next blog post I will explore: What do schools prepare students for?

How Social Media Influencers Have Changed Modern Day Marketing

Source: How to Find & Develop Relationships With Social Media Influencers

The economic principle I’m exploring is that people generally respond to incentives in predictable ways.

 The question I'll be answering in this blog post is: how have social media influencers impacted modern day marketing?

 The article published in Forbes written by the CEO of Gadget Flow Evan Varsamis discusses how social media has impacted marketing in a new light. “Are Social Media Influencers The Next-Generation Brand Ambassadors?” demonstrates this economic principle by arguing that technological advances provide critical data, social media influencers must have a niche theme online, and how marketers need to have an attractive profile that is regularly updated. 

 First, Evan Varsamis explains how marketing has changed as technology has improved. He explains that “Authenticity has always been a prevalent concern in the marketing industry. Marketers and industry experts conduct vast research and surveys to figure out the right level of influence they can have on consumers using advertising. Before online media took over, finding your niche audience through offline advertising was quite daunting. Now things are getting easier thanks to the internet.” The advances in recent years has shown huge accomplishments for the marketing industry that were prior unthinkable. I cannot imagine how hard it would be to reach an audience and find out statistics without the data that can be found via the internet.

 Second, Varsamis describes what it takes to be a social media influencer. This type of marketing is more than just posting to get out to certain audiences. Instead, “social media influencers need a lot more than an audience to be successful. Whether they’re on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram or YouTube, social media influencers need a niche theme in order to make it brand influencer-worthy.” He is explaining that there is some deep-level thinking that goes into being a social media influencer. People that are influencers must come up with ways and have advertisements that help their viewers connect to them on a personable level.

 Third, the CEO of Gadget Flow describes some rules that marketers must use in order to use social media influencers to effectively. He explains that “Your influencer should have the ability to share a personal bond with their followers and display your product in a way their viewers will connect. This is where the sincerity comes in.” He later goes on to explain that people must “make sure to check the frequency of posts and the number of comments they receive on their content, check whether their profile is engaging enough, and if they share “an Instagram ad with [their] influencer, make sure to include [themseves] as a paid partner so [they] can view the campaign statistics.” These essential tactics will allow an easier, more engaging approach for modern day marketing. One of the key things that must be kept in mind for marketers to be successful is to be flexible with the advances that are happening because technological advances play a vital role in how marketing will play out.

 In my next blog post I will research the question: How does psychology play a role in marketing?

The Machines Behind the Magic

The Machines Behind the Magic

UploadVR

The economic principle

I’m exploring is “Because of choices, people choose. All choices have an opportunity cost.” My research question to help me study the economic principle is “Given a scarcity of money, how do individuals choose what brand of graphics cards to purchase when building their computer?”

 The article published in Make Use Of titled “The Best 6 Budget Graphics Cards for Cheap Gaming” demonstrates this economic principle by showing different choices of graphics cards ,the price of graphics cards, and the performance of the respective graphics cards.

 First, I want to point out that in terms of affordable graphics cards, you have to be prepared to receive lower frame rates for high end games, hence “cheap gaming.” In the article, Phillips stated that your graphics card depends on what you want to play. Latest graphics cards will max out the settings on new releases while cheaper graphics cards are better suited for older games.

 Second, cheap graphics cards aren’t that bad. For most popular titles, according to the article, you probably won’t be dropping more than $300 for a graphics card that will meet high standards for very popular games that you likely play. For example, the Nvidia GTX 1060-3GB is very affordable at about $230 and it can run a few popular games greatly. To name a few, on max settings:

• Fortnite 91 FPS
• PUBG 65 FPS,
• Overwatch 93 FPS,
• Battlefield 1 56 FPS

These frames are perfectly fine and you don’t notice many changes in FPS after 60 FPS anyway.


 Third, gamers have been tending to do make a different choice in terms of cheap graphics cards. Instead of buying a cheap, nicely built current graphics card for cheaper gaming, people have been buying the top tier graphics cards of the last generation instead. For example, the The Nvidia GTX 980 and the AMD R9 Fury X. These graphics cards have lots of power and can even run the same games as current graphics cards with still consistent frame rates.

 In my next blog post I will research the question: What is the opportunity cost of different brands and types of computer parts?

Nike ensuring products are what customers want

www.wsj.com

The economic principle I’m exploring is how is Nike so effective when it comes to sales.

My research question to help me study the economic principle is how do companies tailor their items to their consumers likes?

The article published in Forbes titled “Nike Just Does It - Keeping An Eye On The Customer” demonstrates this economic principle by showing that Nike listens to what the customers want, tests the products on their professional athletes, and give customers instant feedback.

First, Nike makes sure they’re selling what the customers need and will use by monitoring them. Nike created a Nike+ app which allows people to track their own runs and compare them with their friends. You’d think this would just be beneficial for these runners but it actually benefits Nike as well, “Everyone gets added value: the customers get something that helps them with their fitness regime and helps them interact with friends, while Nike gets valuable information about how customers are using its products.” This allows Nike to see the trends of their customers and then tailor there products to there needs, listening to their reviews on things such as shoe complaints. In my opinion this is very effective, i'm not very likely to go online and just fill out a questionnaire about what I want in shoes, however I could see myself using this app which accomplished the same thing without the drag of having to do it.

Second, Nike ensures the quality of their products by testing them on their professional athletes first. They do this by “stay[ing] close to the needs of the professional athlete. We put sensors on their bodies and monitor how they perform with our product.” They can then analyse this data and see the pros and cons of the products they’re testing. That’s why you often see professional athletes wearing shoes before they’ve been released to the general public. I love that Nike does this because it creates hype around shoes seeing these athletes wearing them before anyone has them and it's also comforting to know that you're not going to spend money on shoes that will end up breaking.

Third, Nike does a great job of giving their customers instant feedback on the products. One of Nike’s greatest additions to their stores has been the “treadmills they have in Nike stores. Store employees run analyses as people test out shoes. They are then able to make specific shoe recommendations for the customer based on the data collected, like pronation, rotation and how the runner’s foot hits the ground.” This not only helps out the customer by figuring out which shoe is the best fit for them, but also gives data to Nike on what shoes tend to work best for their customers and produce more of those. 

In my next blog post I will research the question: What effect does store location have on Nike’s sales?

How can money and years on a contract incentivize players to signing with a team?

https://www.nbcsports.com/chicago/cubs/jon-lester-most-important-signing-cubs-history

In this article, written by Buster Onley of ESPN.com we are taken back to the winter meatings of early December of 2014 when covetted free agent pitcher Jon Lester narrowed down his choice of where he was going to sign for 2015 on to the Giants, Red Sox, and the destination in which we know he ends up picking the Chicago Cubs. Now what made Jon pick his new team? Was it the manager? The teammates? Their record from last year? The clear answer to those questions is no obviously. Although helping the Cubs contend for the World Series was a motivating factor, ultimately Lester was most motivated by dollars and years. 

 In this case the Chicago Cubs were coming off 89, 96, and 101 losses in the last 3 years. They had a few rising stars coming to the bigs like Anthony Rizzo, Javy Baez, and Starling Castro, but guys that we know today who helped the Cubs win their first world series in 108 years like Addison Russell, Kyle Shwarber, and and future MVP Kris Byrant were just young names in the prospect sytem that die hards like myself were praying would pay off.

 Now yes you could say that Lester picked the Cubs because he wanted to break the 108 year curse like how his former bosses Theo Epstein and Jed Hoyer did in Boston in 2004, but I argue that he was incentivized to join the Chicago Cubs because they gave him more money and years than the San Francisco Giants.

 In those last couple of days during that integral winter meeting Jon had to make a decision and his agent had to negotiate. I believe that behind closed doors this happened. A lot of teams were interested in paying for the talents of the ace but after consistent bidding and stubborn negociating it came down to two. The Cubs and Giants

 They went back and forth for hours and I bet Jon’s agent kept pushing for this. Just put one more year on the contract and the deal is done. Reports said that what was holding up the deat was that neither the Cubs or the Giants would offer more than 5 years to Lester. My theory is after hours of talking I believe the Cubs gave in because they new that the 6th year of the 155 million dollar contract was key for their World Series aspirations

 And the rest is history.

In my next blog post, I'll look at how was the Shohei Otani case first of its kind and unseen in baseball history?

What can players do that would endanger their football career and their life?

What a lifetime of playing football can do to the human brain

In the article "Do no harm: Retired NFL players endure a lifetime of hurt In the NFL " talks about football players, and their everyday problems they have to deal with. Also how NFL players in the long run ruined their lives.

 “More than nine in 10 players reported suffering at least one major injury while in the NFL. More than half reported three or more; one in five reported five or more.” This shows that every player risks having big problems in the future. Also having to live the rest of their lives with their injury, because of what football has done to them.

 Chris Cooley, that was a tight end, a two-time Pro Bowler with the Washington Redskins said “If you have brains when you start, you are aware that banging your head into people is not the best thing for your body.” What this means is that young NFL players aren’t thinking about their lives later on in life. They don’t know that they will have some sort of problem after their football career is over.

NFL football players care about one thing and its how much money are they going to get. Players that are making millions only think about the present, they never think about the future, and their lives after football.

Do certain positions in football effect on how long of a career a player can have?

The TV market and how they use Fandoms

blackgirlnerds.com

Institutions are the “rules of the game” that influence choices. 

What are the Cons of the TV market using social media to create a fandom? 

           The articles I used are dailydot.com(how the corporate world targets fandoms) by Gavia Baker-Whitelaw, and qualitylogoproducts.com(the pitfalls on relying on brand fandoms) by Bubba, which both lay out the cons of the fandom/market relationship. The Cons are the TV markets manipulation of the fans, the fan's manipulation of the market, and the finickiness of a fandom base.

            Let’s start with how the TV market, sometimes- because fandom’s are not very reliably created- create fandoms for their shows. Teen wolf and Hannibal are both very successful shows despite some bad ratings because of the fandoms behind them. How did they do it? Well, as Ms. Baker-Whitelaw states, “Both of these shows began with that rarest of animals: an official Tumblr account that actually spoke to fans like a regular Tumblr user, rather than seeming like someone’s embarrassing uncle using the Internet for the first time.” She believes, as do many others, that the key to their success was their social media presence that catered to the fandoms, before and after the show. This causes some problems. Problems, for instance, like queerbaiting, which is a term that means that a tv show, book, or movie says there is LGBT+ representation, when in fact there is either less than what they say there is, or none at all. This quite obviously shuts down a great portion of the fandom against the show. Shows like Teen wolf, or Voltron, or Supernatural; all shows I watched but couldn't handle how badly they handled non-canonical LGBT+ relationships.

           Which brings me to the next topic. If the show makes a particular brand for themselves, and then later decides it wants to change that brand, a lot of the times fandom’s refuse the change outright. Brands are a ;large [part of a fandom, it’s how they connect with the show and with their fellow fans. Imagine if the Cubs decided they wanted to stop being a baseball team, instead they wanted to be a swimming team. So many people would be very upset. But of course, can you even imagine a sports team changing sport. Like, that would never happen. That’s how a lot of the fans feel when they enter a fandom, and when that change happens, they get very upset.

 “And, so, if you intend cultivate a fandom, be careful not to just assume they’ll be willing to accept anything you do, and be wary of too drastic a change in your product, company, or image.” (Bubba) 

The fandom came to be for a reason, changing that reason almost always has negative effects. The fandoms manipulate the market to get what they want.

           Of course, the fans aren’t the only ones that are manipulating people. TV shows tend to use their fandoms for publicity, to gain more people, to get more money, so they can make more stuff, and gain more people to gain more publicity, to make more money. It’s a circle that shows the manipulation of the market.

“You may love the cutesy Twitter feed for your favorite TV show, but they only love you for your money. Or your Likes.”(Baker-Whitelaw)

 Next up: What the relationship of mainstream fandoms and the market looks like?

Sumo Wrestlers and School Teachers

Source: cooladata.com 

• 
   Three major influences of motivation is Moral, social, and economic ¨The typical economist believes the world has not yet invented a problem that he can not fix if given a free hand to design the proper incentive scheme,” (Levitt) This chapter in freakonomics spoke on how there are three major influences on people in general, Moral, Social and Economic.

•  The book used Cigarettes as a major example for all three.They mentioned when the government launched an ad campaign that pronounced Terrorist organizations made millions off of the selling and trading of cigarettes people here in the us had a moral conflict about buying Cigs and the demand went down. This shows us a solid example of how moral incentives can shift and move our economy.  

• The social incentives controls us in ways such as when the government banned smoking cigarettes in bars that limited the social use in cigarettes which in turn affected the sale of cigarettes nationwide. Because people were no longer aloud to smoke with friends in bars they cut back on the amount of cigarettes they buy. This affected the supply demand of Cigarettes in a negatively way in that now the demand for cigs went significantly down. 

•  Economic incentives are the most common. But still also very powerful. Sticking with the theme of cigs, when the government put a $3 tax on every pack purchased the public had to seriously question if their fix was worth that extra three dollar and again we saw a dip in the demand of cigarettes. 

•  These small changes in tiny areas of our lives make big impacts in the business of selling cigarettes. These three examples all combined are what lead to the sharp decrease from 50.1% of the population smoking down to 16.4% of the population smoking according to the CDC. This chapter did a really good job of showing how our social actions moral conflicts and economic incentives actually matter in our economic world.

Future Question How the KKK is like a group of Realestate agents?

Record Companies Are Outdated!

The Big Music Project 

The economic principle I’m exploring is: Institutions are the “rules of the game” that influence choices.

My research question to help me study the economic principle is: What laws/rules that record companies put on jazz musicians to lower or raise their income?

The article published in RollingStone, an American monthly magazine founded by Jann Wenner that focuses on popular culture and focus to a younger readership interested in youth-oriented television shows, film actors, and popular music, titled “Musicians Get Only 12 Percent of the Money the Music Industry Makes” demonstrates this economic principle by arguing/showing that practices like recording music with record companies are outdated and take too much money away from musicians. Instead, by using technology such as streaming and live concerts musicians can cutout the middlemen and keep more money for themselves.

RollingStone

Technology has given consumers more options for purchasing music. U.S. listeners spend over $20 billion a year on buying music.  The entire industry including on-demand streams, CD sales, radio play, live events,  have made more than $43 billion a year. However, artists only take home $5 billion, or about 12 percent.

This is because of “value leakage” involved in producing and distributing music, like the costs of running, fixing, streaming, etc… that the record companies have to do. “When you end up tracing all the dollars, around 10 percent of it gets captured by the artist. That’s amazingly low.” I am shocked by this. There are so many musicians out there and if I was dreaming of making it big out there, I would just give it up because it is not worth the hard work and risk of it all. I can’t afford anything with the money they give me.

I believe artists should be able to deliver their music directly to fans and take the majority, if not all, of the profit. But as said by Citigroup’s media, cable and satellite researcher Jason Bazinet, who co-authored the report, tells Rolling Stone that “the music business is still largely operating on the systems that it used to use decades ago, when songs were sold in stores and owned in homes and not licensed and leased via the Internet.” If Internet music companies were to “organically morph into music labels,” as Citi’s research report suggests, or if concert promoters merged with streaming services, the music business would be cutting out superfluous middlemen and offering that money back to artists themselves.” I think this is an excellent idea because musicians should be able to keep more of the money they earn---it's already difficult for artists to get into the industry and make a living.


Eventually, “Citi’s analysts estimate that the friction will decrease over time, however. It notes that artists are already getting more of industry revenue than in past years through avenues like touring and self-releasing music — both of which generate much more money than a traditional record label deal.” I glad that this old custom is being updated. We want music and if the companies don’t change their ways, there is going to be shortage of people wanting new music and not enough musicians dealing it out because of these unfair customs.

In my next blog post I will research the question: Does a jazz musician benefit more from live concerts or records?

hearing vs. deaf culture

nrn.com

The economic principle I’m exploring is “People gain when they trade voluntarily”

 My research question to help me study the economic principle is:
 What is the difference between hearing and deaf culture?

 The article published in Soft Schools titled “Deaf Culture vs Hearing Culture” demonstrates this economic principle by showing That deaf people are able to feel more accepted by forming their own community , Deaf people gave up fitting in and chose to be happier with their own language, and, that it allows deaf people to feel empowered about themselves rather than feeling less than hearing people. 

First, deaf people formed their own communities because they were seen as less than hearing people so they banded together. The reason that this is significant is that it allowed for sign language to develop more fully and become easily learned.

 Second, deaf people chose to separate themselves from the hearing world in order to feel less outcast. By doing this, the deaf community has a very strong bond.

 Third, by Deaf people forming Deaf communities, it allows them to feel empowered and welcomed, rather than like a misfit.

 In my next blog post I will research the question: What is the best way to educate hearing people about the deaf?

Nike's strongest advertisement methods

www.qz.com

The economic principle I’m exploring is how is Nike so effective when it comes to sales.

My research question to help me study the economic principle is what is so strong about Nike’s marketing strategy? 

The article published by Zareem Islam titled “Nike’s Brilliant Marketing Strategy - Why You Should Be (Just) Doing it Too” demonstrates this economic principle by showing that Nike ads consist of emotional branding, release the newest and most innovative technology, and run well set up social media accounts.

First, Nike does a great job when creating advertisements that actually influence the audience to go out and make a change. As the article explains “Each ad is carefully crafted to evoke particular feelings and needs in the consumer that can only be satisfied by Nike products.” which is much more inspiring than just introducing a product. Their main slogan is “Just Do It” which might seem simple but that serves a phrase of inspiration for consumers.

Second, Nike is always staying on top of things and ensuring that they’re releasing the newest technology for their consumers. They have done many “firsts” and one of the most recent ones being the release of Hyper Adapt shoes which are self lacing. Consumers always want to buy the nicest products and in this scenario they see this technology that nobody else has which’ll cause them to go out and buy it.

Third, Nike isn’t afraid to stay in touch with their consumers. They have a bunch of different Instagram and Twitter accounts set up (soccer, football, running, etc.) where they are constantly advertising their products. They also take time to go through twitter comments and actually respond to those people who have questions about their products. These strong relationships that they’re building with their customers through social media ensures that these customers will keep coming back because they feel they’ve built this bond with the company.

In my next blog post I will research the question: How do companies tailor their items to their consumers likes/needs?

How do Tech Companies Use Customer Feedback.

                    Because of scarcity, people choose. All choices have an opportunity cost.

R&D

Today people are so demanding, and if they don’t like a product they will not buy it. This happened to Apple when they released the iPhone 5c. People thought that the phone was nothing new and just a stunt to raise revenue, and it backfired. Apple’s stock price fell and people stopped buying their products. So after that they started using customer feedback to develop new products. According to the website, Myfeelback one big reason Apple has maintained a spot at the top of their industry in because of how much they use customer feedback to guide their R&D endeavors.

 I think that it is crucial to listen to your customers, because they are the people that are buying the products these companies sell. That is one reason that I believe Apple has been atop their industry for so long and are a common household name.

Future Research Question: How do companies use their products to influence society.

Diabetes Medicinal Price Trends

Source: ADA

Institutions are the “rules of the game” that influence choices

 What overall trends are visible in medicinal prices? 

The article published in The American Diabetes Association titled “The Cost of Diabetes” demonstrates this economic principle by showing how prices for Diabetes are increasing exponentially, prices for Diabetes change depending on factors like gender, and Diabetes costs extend past patients, including indirectly affecting other businesses.

                 First, the American Diabetes Association discusses the trends and statistics regarding overall diabetes costs. They talk about the increase in costs between two separate studies, saying that “The estimated total economic cost of diagnosed diabetes in 2017 is $327 billion, a 26% increase from our previous estimate of $245 billion.” This nearly one hundred billion dollar difference is in the span of five years, showing a massive growth in the costs.

                 Next, the ADA discusses some of the trends within these costs. They talk about many of the factors that affect individual costs of diabetes. One such factor is gender. The article is cited saying “Total... health expenditures are higher among men than women ($10,060 vs. $9,110).” They don’t expand on reasons behind this cost gap, but the thousand dollar difference shows that individual pricing may vary, even though overall trends are still increasing. Costs for one diabetic are purely dependent on things like genetics, gender, etc.

                 Finally, the article offers an unconventional way of looking at prices for Diabetes. The article cites many factors that are indirectly affected by the disease, including but not limited to “increased absenteeism and reduced productivity while at work for the employed population… inability to work as a result of disease-related disability… and lost productive capacity due to early mortality.” This quote offers the reader a new way of looking at costs of a disease, something that can highly affect the prices of the medicine we use to treat it. The site also uses specific prices after each factor, in order to help readers understand the impact that this disease can have on not only those that have it but the economy as a whole.

 In my next blog post I will research: What are the current regulations regarding medicinal prices?

Effect of mental illness stigma on society

The economic principle I’m exploring is “Institutions are ‘the rules of the game’ that influence choices".

Courtesy of drdeborahserani.blogspot.com/

My research question to help me study the economic principle is “What are the societal challenges that people with mental illness face?”

The article published in Psychology Today titled The Stigma of Mental Illness Is Making Us Sicker demonstrates this economic principle by showing how stigmas around mental illness came about in the first place, the difficulties that people with mental illness encounter in their daily lives, and how those difficulties further damage their health.

 Stigmas surrounding mental illness come about at a young age. Children are taught words like “weird”, “crazy”, “psycho” and “retarded” in regards to people with mental illness, and these words are commonly misused to create a strong negative connotation surrounding mental illness. Soon, negative perceptions are formed towards the mentally ill, and thus stigmas are formed. I have experienced that often times, mental illness is so closely linked to these negative words that they become nearly synonymous in some people´s opinion, when people use ¨bipolar¨, ¨OCD¨, or ¨anorexic¨, to name a few, colloquially.

 This causes people to distance themselves from people with mental health, sometimes because they feel unsafe. Because of social distances, the mentally ill are subject to isolation and stereotyping. It is easy to be unconsciously discriminated against in the workforce because of misinformation of what their mental illness is. Research shows that being treated poorly can worsen mental illness. The isolation created from social distances can make patients less likely to seek treatment for their illness. I experienced that I almost did not receive treatment because I was worried what people would say when I wasn´t at school. Along with that, the stigma can spread to affect how the mentally ill feel about themselves. Embarrassment is a common thing when it comes to mental illness, which is crazy in my opinion because it´so both very common and should not be very different from physical illness. It would be crazy to be embarrassed about cancer, diabetes, etc.

 In my next blog post, I will research the question: What does the country do to aid those with mental illness?

How do 'No Trade' Clauses,player options, and other contract manipulations help incentivize players to sign with teams?

In the 21st century, we are seeing more and more deals being made with special contract manipulations. Manipulations such as opt-out clauses and no-trade clauses have just as much power to incentivize a player has sheer numbers of dollars and years. In this specific case, found in the article “Boldest January Signings of this Century” written by Matt Kelly of MLB.com, the New York Mets shockingly signed their Cuban superstar, Yoenis Cespedes, to a three year deal with a huge caveat.

The opt out clause after one year. The Mets came off a pennant championship and money was tight going forward in the future so the prospects of bringing back their slugging left fielder was non existent, but “an offer from the rival Nationals spurred New York's front office into action. The Mets convinced Cespedes to ink a three-year deal that included an opt-out clause after the first season. The star outfielder opted out in the fall of '16, before inking a four-year, $110 million deal to stay in Queens.” It worked perfectly for both sides. Cespedes probably wanted security in his contract for 2016 to account for possible injury or poor performance, but still wanted to earn a paycheck comparable to what he believed his skills represented. At the time, my first reaction, was “wow… that front office really had to do some magic to pull that off”. New York’s front office couldn’t afford to sign him long term and maybe didn't want to at the time, but the keep Yoenis from going to their divisional rival they pulled it off. This is one of my favorite deals in history because of the option and the faith that Cespedes had to have in himself, and the faith that the Mets had in him.


            The reason why this article even was written was, because at the time, the free agent market was as cold as any time in history and the two biggest stars of that class, Yu Darvish and Jake Arrietta, were offered contracts finally and were signed. As a Cubs fan and with the 2018 post season wrapped up for my Cubbies I can say that we made the wrong move, but who knows where these two players careers will end up after the 6 years 110 million and 3 years have passed. But this was another example of teams trying to incentivize players. The Cubs who have been notorious for making big moves in the winter the past five years with Jon Lester’s huge deal, Ben Zobrist’s, and Jason Heyward’s which is one I will delve into soon. Both Darvish and Arrieta were offered the same contract but Arrieta declined and Darvish excepted.

Why? I myself having been asking this question over and over again watching Jake pitch a wonderful season in Philadelphia while Darvish is getting neuropic surgery on his shoulder, but in the context of economics its because of the incentives. If the Cubs sprinkled in an opt-out for next year or a no-trade clause Jake most likely would have agreed to that like how he did in Phily with his 3 year deal with TWO opt-outs!

 Next topic question will be "How does money and years on a contract help incentivize players to picking a destination?"