Streaming and the Music Industry

spotify.com

The economic principle I am researching is supply and demand In the music industry and how it both drives and shapes the music industry as a whole. In today's blog post I will discuss how streaming services have shaped the music industry.

 In recent years online music streaming services have dominated the market. In 2003 the market for music was controlled by CD´s: producing 94% if the industries revenue. Today 75% of the music industry's revenue comes from online music streaming (Econlife.com).

 Because of this jump from physical to electronic good´s the artists have less control over the price of the music they make. Basically Spotify pay the artists indirectly (by paying the record label) a fraction of their profits that are equal to the fraction of streams that each artist gets. The more streams an artist gets, the more profit they get. Spotify gets its revenues through ads and through those who upgrade to premium.

 Personally I do not like the direction the music industry is moving. The music industry today almost forces artists to put all their music on music streaming services. Songs on music streaming services are in large supply and songs are complementary good to each other: If you're listening to Ed Sheeran Ariana Grande can be a complementary good. If artist do not put songs on spotify they will get little or no attention from consumers.

In my next blog post I will explore why songs are getting shorter.

How will the MLB regulate its players from using PED's?

Barry Bonds (Source: mccoveychronicles.com)

The MLB perhaps is the sport where PED's are most prominent, steroids in particular.

In an article written by Scholarship.edu, they talk about how the rules/policy have not done too much. "Of course when most people refer to baseball's "Steroid Era" they mean the period of time from the late 1980's until the mid-2000's, when anabolic steroid use pervaded the sport. Major League Baseball has since cleaned up its act by instituting its Joint Drug Prevention and Treatment Program, but that hasn't stopped some players from using performance enhancing drugs in violation of federal law and baseball policy."

With my economic policy being Institutions, "rules of the game" so to speak, the rules have clearly been broken many times by these players. For them, it is a way to rack up their home run total which in return would land them bigger contracts. In today's game, we see still see many big time players getting busted. Alex Rodriguez of the New York Yankees is a great example. He was a stud for the Yanks for over a decade. Just like anything else in life, the players look at their careers and the MLB as a business. They will do anything they can to perform better so they can make more money as a result. "Since Major League Baseball lacks subpoena power, there's only so much they can do to stop tnulti-millionaires who have the desire to gain any advantage they can." - T Quinn in the article by Scholarship.edu.

My prediction is that MLB players will still take the risk of using these drugs to perform at higher levels.

Next blog post: How will Tour De France officials regulate players from using PED's?

What are alternate options for sports players who are injured/need training?

Athletic Trainers work with their patients in the patients' environment. 

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 do athletic trainers differ from physical therapists and what do they do differently?” The article published by Study.com titled “Athletic Trainer Vs. Physical Therapist” demonstrates this economic principle by showing the difference between Athletic Trainers and Physical therapists, What the two do differently, and what else a player can use rather than an athletic trainer.

 First, the difference between an athletic trainer and a physical therapist is difficult to understand unless explained well. An athletic trainer work with athletes and players to help prevent injuries and giving workouts to assist a person if they are actively trying to prevent or treat an injury. Athletic trainers help prepare the athletes for practice and games-whether that’s wrapping a pitchers wrist or helping them stretch out better. They also assess and document the injuries that occur and document how they are treating them since they help the injured player with the treatments and workouts in order to bring the player back to their sport in a timely manner. A physical therapist only works with injured people-not only athletes but also elderly, people who have been involved in car accidents, and anyone else who have been injured. Physical therapists teach their patients exercises to improve their injuries, monitor their movements and progress along with making sure that their patients don’t have any issues with mobility.

 Second, the physical therapists and athletic trainers share some of the same responsibilities for their patients, but approach the situations differently. When a patient is injured, an athletic trainer can diagnose them with an injury and acknowledge what is wrong with the patient. The athletic trainer then comes up with plans to help the patient go back to their sport as fast as possible, while the physical therapist also helps them return to a sport, most of their patients don’t do sports so they don’t have to do things as quick as an athletic trainer would. Athletic trainers also work with the injured athletes everyday for large amounts of time and also give them exercises to do while physical therapists work with senior citizens, some athletes, kids/teens, people who have been involved in accidents, or people who have had surgery.


In my next blog post I will research the question: Who are the people that need athletic trainers the most? What do they NEED from the trainers?

How has the increasing awareness of environmental issues affected the exotic pet trade over the years? Has the environmental movement shrank it?

                                                          Source: sciencemag.org



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 “How does the varying legality of exotic pet ownership around the world influence the exotic pet trade?”

 My sub-research question is “How has the increasing awareness of environmental issues affected the trade over the years? Has the environmental movement shrank it?”

 An article published on the website EarthTimes titled “More Awareness and Information for Potential Exotic Pet Owners” by Tamara Croes demonstrates this economic principle by showing that sometimes it’s not necessarily legality that influences people’s choices altogether, but rather popular culture and general awareness of the world that has a stronger impact.

 First, I found that according to the American Center,“The modern day environmental movement in the United States began in the in 1960s and 1970s.” and it “was originally focused on a few prominent environmental issues and disasters” rather than larger, more general movements (like sustainability or species conservation). Though it’s become much more varied and mainstream than it was 40-50 years ago, some of the more specific sub-movements still haven’t gained much recognition.

 Second, I found that while environmental awareness has grown in public consciousness, ironically, so has exotic pet ownership. As observed in the article “Young Collectors, Traders Help Fuel a Boom in Ultra-Exotic Pets” by Rachael Bale (which was cited in a previous post) “Not surprisingly, sales of a particular animal increase enormously when they are featured in a popular movie.” Though a person may be pretty environmentally aware in other aspects of their life - recycling, saving power, avoiding unnecessary waste - they may still be victim of the influence of popular culture, and decide on buying an exotic pet without sufficient research beforehand if they’re enthused enough by its appearance in a movie, for example.

Third, I’d like to point out that while general, overall environmental awareness may have grown over time, there’s still not much information or awareness about the issues raised by exotic animals as pets. Often, people have no context or proper information as to where their pet came from, or whether or not it’s ethical to keep one in the first place. An article by Tamara Croes on the organization EarthTimes’s website (mentioned earlier on in this post) focuses on some of the most prominent issues of this trade and how few people are aware of them. Though not many people would be surprised that “The illegal trade in wildlife could cause many already endangered species to become extinct” or that “Transportation can be fatal to as many as 70% of the animals”, there are a host of other problems that few are aware of. For example, a prominent problem “is the accidental or deliberate release of pets into the wild” which can endanger native species and the ecological balance. Additionally, the trafficking of exotic animals has contributed to “the spread of diseases” that would otherwise never appear in the U.S. The organization EcoHealth Alliance “recently issued a press release addressing the problems caused by keeping exotic animals as pets and calling for more education of the public and better awareness” in the hopes that “Better awareness and information could help potential pet owners to make a more responsible choice, preferably not to buy an exotic pet.”


In my next blog post I will research the question: Has making the exotic pet trade entirely illegal (in the US) actually damaged the market? Or has it only strengthened its appeal to buyers?

There is not a scarcity of wind, light, or flowing water so why not use it more often?

SOURCE: The Electrochemical Society

The economic principle I'm exploring is institutions are the "rules of the game" that influence
choices.

First, according to the US Energy Information Administration, "renewable energy is energy from sources that are naturally replenishing but flow-limited. They are virtually inexhaustible in duration but limited in the amount of energy that is available per unit of time."

Sounds pretty good right? Then why aren't we taking advantage of these brand new energy sources? There are many reasons why and why not, for my third post I will focus especially on the availability of these renewable resources.

Wind: The potential of wind power is enormous more than 20 times greater than what the human population needs. The problem is harnessing all of that energy for redistribution to further improve our lives now and in the future. Obviously the wind is a constantly changing natural force, which makes it difficult to transfer all of that potential energy into batteries. We just simply cannot create enough electricity from wind power to power a city for example.

Solar: Solar power is energy from the sun that is converted into thermal or electrical energy. Solar energy is the cleanest and most abundant renewable energy source available, and the U.S. has some of the richest solar resources in the world. The great thing about solar is it can be produced and consumed as needed, by anyone, rich or poor, and anywhere, in remote areas and city centers. 

Hydro: It is very available, Hydro energy generates power in every region of the country and is America's largest source of clean, renewable electricity. Hydro power requires only the power of America's moving waters rivers, streams and ocean tides to generate electricity so it is very easy to obtain since we have a lot of place in the US that have access to fast moving waters.



Sources:

Wind Energy

Solar Energy

Hydro Energy

How Has Technology Influenced People's Music Tastes?

Mercury News

The economic principle that I am researching is that people generally respond to incentives in predictable ways, and how technology has changed our methods of listening to music.

My research question to help me study the economic principle is how technology has changed our methods of listening to music.

First and most obviously, with the world becoming more and more digital, our methods of listening to  music have evolved as well.  Now that everyone has a cell phone, it is very easy to download and app on them and listen to just about any song that you want.  If you can't find it on any of the various streaming platforms, you can turn to Youtube or other websites and find any song you could imagine.  The ability to listen to any song you would like with just a few clicks of your finger has been imperative in keeping music from the past very relevant.  I know that many people, myself included, take advantage of these music streaming apps by listening to a lot of music from the 1960s-1980s and even some from before then.  Before this was the case, people could only listen to the CD's or records that they had.  Of course this didn't stop them from creating an extensive collection of CD's so they could listen to all of their favorite songs.

Next, as I stated in my last post, music producers have the ability to make a song with almost any instrument they can imagine with just a laptop and a pair of headphones.  This has been imperative in evolution of the genres that people listen to.  As technology has improved over the years, producers have clearly been able to make electronic songs and beats for artists to sing or rap over much more advanced and intricate.  On top of that, with producers being able to post their music to multiple streaming sources immediately after they finish, we as listeners have new music much more readily available to us.

In my next post I will be discussing how technology has influenced the style of music that can be produced.

Is robotic labor more efficient than human labor?

Is robotic labor more efficient than human labor? 

 We humans have been designed to work. It’s how we get things done in this world and it is what allows us to earn a roof over our heads --by getting for working of course-- but what happens when someone builds a machine to do our job for us. And just because the machine exists doesn’t necessarily mean that it is better than us. So that begs the question: Is a robots productivity worth more than human productivity.

 According to the article, “Production Soared After This Factory Replaced 90% of Its Employees With Robots” a factory in China had replaced 90 percent of its workers with machines. This led to a increase in productivity by 250 percent and a reduction in defects by 80 percent. Supposedly this company need 650 employees to produce mobile phones. Now it only has 60 employees with 60 machines. According to the general manager of the company, the number of workers could even decrease to 20 and he claims that it won’t be long until other companies start following this trend. So judging by these numbers, humans just can’t compete in this type of work environment. Next I will research on how automation can harm human employment in the long run

scarcity of top tier players in the NBA

Effects of super teams on the league

The economic principle I’m exploring is “ how does scarcity of top tier players affect teams decisions when developing rosters.

My research question to help me study the economic principle is  how are teams able to establish such stacked rosters with limited space.

The article The downstream effect of the NBA´super team era dives into the effect super teams have had on the rest of the league

First, having these super teams all around the league has created a top heavy league where only a small percent of teams have a chance of winning the title, this takes a lot of teams out of the equation for competing for a title, forcing teams to try and establish their own super team

Second, since the league has become ¨top heavy¨ many teams that fail in creating their own superteam start the rebuilding process where they tank the season in hopes of landing a high draft pick which allows them to be better in the future

Third,  since the rebuilding process takes multiple years work in full effect teams that choose that route are going to be very bad for years to come, this is just bad for the organization but for the fans as well.

In my next blog post I will research the question: why isn't every NBA team able to establish their own super team?

What ways do Soccer Trades happen that being loans, selling players, or player swaps?

                      

                                                           Source: The Guardian

The Economic principal I’m doing is People gain when they trade voluntarily.

 My Topic is: What ways do Soccer Trades happen that being loans, selling players, or player swaps?

 The subtopic I’m doing today is What happens if something were to happen to the player in question?

 During the winter transfer window, the Welsh team Cardiff was had bought the Argentine player Emiliano Sala for a club record price of £15 million (about $19.7m) from the French team of FC Nantes. His contract would last three and a half years, because he signed in the second half of the season, so it would have been from now until from to the end of this season and three more season, or until 2022.

 When Sala went to Cardiff went to get his physical done and to go sign paperwork, everything was fine and dandy, but when he went back to France to go home and probably to say his goodbyes to his team, and on his final trip to Cardiff, January 21, the airplane he was flying in went missing over the English Channel the last know contact with the airplane was with a control tower off the island of Guernsey in the channel. Sala’s lifeless body was found on February 7th.

 Now even though Mr.Sala passed away Cardiff still has to pay, yet they didn’t want to. If no payment was made to Nantes by February 18, Cardiff would face a needed transfer window ban, if this were to happen, then this would affect their next season because they are in danger of relegations

thackeraytroy.wordpress.com

The economic principle I’m exploring is, “People generally respond to incentives in predictable ways.”

My research question to help me study the economic principle is, “Do people realize that advertisements have an effect on them? And do advertisements work unknowingly?”

The article published in Psychology Today titled “What Does Advertising Do” demonstrates this economic principle by arguing/showing advertisements work without you realizing it, advertisements use basic human psychology to influence consumers, and even if you tune out an advertisement you will still be affected.

First, many advertisements work without you even realizing it. Companies know this so they use eye catching images with their brand name prominently promoted to just get their company name in your head. For example if you see an advertisement for a pen company you may tune it out, but now your brain associates pens to X company. So the next time that you are out shopping for pens you will purchase theirs just because you have that connection. A study was conducted studying the connection between viewing an advertisement and whether or not you will purchase the good. The study results are as followed, “The people who went through the affective conditioning procedure picked the pen that was paired with positive items 70-80% of the time.” This means that someone will buy your item 70-80% of the time just because your brand name is associated to that good. The implementations of this are endless because companies that devote many of their resources to advertisements will make much more money.

Second, companies use basic human psychology to make their advertisements as impactful as possible. Whenever you view an advertisement you are often greeted with bright colors, large logos, and happy people enjoying their product. It gets to the point that someone is on the verge of crying tears of joy over how wonderful their laundry detergent cleans their cloths. This stays with your thought because you will associate X brand with happiness. The author Art Markman Ph.D. says in his article that, “If we have to make a choice, and one of the options just feels good to us, then we are likely to go with the one that feels good.” This means that just because something looks and feels good that we will buy it. This is just like all the Coke ads you see whether the paid actor is smiling and drinking a can of sugar syrup. This means that we do not have as much free will when it comes to purchasing as we may believe.

 Third, you will be affected by advertisements even if you think you are tuning them out. This relates to the previous paragraphs, but I feel that this needs to be looked into in more depth because of just how powerful advertisements truly are. It is kind of scary to think of how easily manipulated the average consumer is. The author Art Markman Ph.D. says, “Over the two studies in this paper, the authors found that people chose the pen that was paired with positive objects even when people were given as much time as they wanted to make a choice, and even when the instructions specifically encouraged them to pick the best choice and to say why they were choosing a particular pen.” This basically means that the average consumer has no power over what they are purchasing even when presented with free choice.

In my next blog post I will research the question: Do advertisements that focus on life style work better than traditional advertisements?

Wealth Disparity in the United States

Source : Forbes

The article "Wealth Inequality Is Way Worse Than You Think, And Tax Havens Play A Big Role", by Pedro Nicolaci da Costa demonstrates the economic principle that institutions are the “rules of the game” that influence choices. In it, the author explains how drastically the wealth disparity in the U.S has grown over the past years, and shines light on loopholes the wealthy use in order to grow their riches.

In the article, the author mentions that wealth is now more concentrated than it was in the "Roaring" 1920's, as "The richest 1% of Americans currently own a whopping 40$ of total household wealth." Another quote mentions how "No country (apart from Russia) for which estimates of wealth inequality are available has similarly high recorded levels of wealth inequality." Considering the oligopolistic manner of Russia's economy, this is a surprising quote to read. This inequality may not affect our everyday lives right now, but it plays a big role in the also decreasing social mobility in the United States. As more and more money is going to the top 1%, it is not trickling down to the other 99% of Americans. If incomes remain the same, consumer buying power will decrease as they will have to pay a higher percentage of their income for the same goods.

The idea of sending your money to foreign banks with law tax laws has always been a good idea for those who wish to avoid paying taxes, and it has become an increasingly popular option for the world's rich recently. Mentioned in the article is that "Statistics recently released by the central banks of a number of prominent tax havens suggest that the equivalent of 10% of world GDP is held in tax havens globally." The fact that the true number of wealth that the 1% holds may still be underrepresented is goes to show how economically unequal the world is becoming. 

Some may say that there is no way to stop this, as low-skill workers will continue to be exploited for cheap labor and magnates will continue to profit off their work because that's how the market works. While this may be true, a step to solve the disparity would be for the U.S government to implement stricter tax codes and make it harder to take advantage of the loopholes that allow billionaires to pay less taxes than a middle-class family. While it may be the inevitable result of a capitalistic society, the government should always fight for fairness and equality.

In my next blog post, I will cover student loan debt.

What countries will benefit from free trade?

What countries will benefit from free trade?

The Economic Principle I’m Exploring is that people gain when they trade voluntarily

My research question to help me study the economic principle is How does free trade help Americans

The article published by Cato Institute called the Benefit of Free Trade demonstrates the principle by
showing how many countries would benefit from free trade.

First the article discusses how if we get cheap goods from other countries it lowers the price of goods which overall benefit consumers and businesses.  According to Kreiger “the objective of free trade is therefore to get goods on advantageous terms”. This will let people satisfy their wants. It also lets us benefit from the division of labor and comparative advantage.

Secondly the article brings up how if we have free trade both countries that are trading with each other can
prosper.For example if Switzerland is very good at making watches and need wheat While Canada is
good at growing wheat but need watches. They should be able to trade with each other freely. This allows
prosperity because people will be able to produce goods that they have a competitive advantage over.
Thus providing this product to other places in the world.

Lastly going off of the second point some countries are able to make better products. By providing free
trade it will allow for all countries to profit at things that they are good at making.

In my next blog post I will discuss How does free trade have an affect on jobs?