Bolivians fight over quinoa land

Not much I can add to this story. Click here to read it.

"LA PAZ, Bolivia (AP) — Bolivian authorities say at least 30 people have been injured in a fight between two communities over land for growing quinoa, the Andean "supergrain" whose popularity with worldwide foodies has caused its price to soar.

Oruro state police chief Ramon Sepulveda says combatants used rocks and dynamite against each other Wednesday and Thursday. A government commission was dispatched to the two high plains communities south of La Paz.

Farmland in the region is owned not by individuals but communities.

Authorities say the dispute is related to climate change because quinoa can now be cultivated in areas previously subject to frequents frosts.

Bolivia produces 46 percent of the world's quinoa, which has nearly tripled in price in the past five years."

Supply And Demand And Comic Books

See Man's childhood comic collection fetches $3.5M by Jamie Stengle of the Associated Press. Excerpts:

"A copy of Detective Comics No. 27, which sold for 10 cents in 1939 and features the debut of Batman, got the top bid at the New York City auction Wednesday. It sold for about $523,000..."

"Action Comics No. 1, a 1938 issue featuring the first appearance of Superman, sold for about $299,000..."

Why would a 10 cent comic from 1938 sell for so much now? There must be a great demand and it looks like there is not much of a supply since

"Of the 200,000 copies of Action Comics No. 1 produced, about 130,000 were sold and the about 70,000 that didn't sell were pulped. Today, experts believe only about 100 copies are left in the world..."

And barring fakes or forgeries or specially marked reprints, more copies of Action Comics #1 cannot be produced. So the price is not likely to fall very much.

DC Comics did issue some reprints in the 1970s, but they were over-sized and clearly marked as reprints. Click here to see some of them.

The CPI is about 16 times higher today than in 1939. That would make the price of Detective Comics #27 $1.60 instead of 10 cents. If you put $1.60 in an investment in 1939 and if it grew 19.29% per year for 72 years, it would end up being about $523,000 in 2011. If you put the $1.60 in the stock market and if it grew 10% per year for the 72 years, it would only end up being about $1,529 in 2011.

The Future Is Better Than You Think

That is the subtitle of a book recently reviewed in The Wall Street Journal. See Defying the Doomsayers: "Abundance" argues that growing technologies have the potential not only to spread information but to solve some of humanity's most vexing problems. The review mentions that some optimism might be good in these negative times although it discusses how over-optimism can be damaging. Perhaps the human race is always searching for the right or optimal amount of optimism.

The book they reviewed is called Abundance: The Future Is Better Than You Think by Peter H. Diamandis and Steven Kotler.

Here are excerpts from the review:

"Mr. Diamandis is the chairman and chief executive of the X Prize Foundation and the founder of more than a dozen high-tech companies. With his journalist co-author, he has produced a manifesto for the future that is grounded in practical solutions addressing the world's most pressing concerns: overpopulation, food, water, energy, education, health care and freedom. The authors suggest that "humanity is now entering a period of radical transformation where technology has the potential to significantly raise the basic standard of living for every man, woman, and child on the planet.""

"Given all the talk nowadays about income inequality, the authors' discussion of poverty is especially instructive. The number of people in the world living in absolute poverty has fallen by more than half since the 1950s. At the current rate of decline it will reach zero by around 2035. Groceries today cost 13 times less than 150 years ago in inflation-adjusted dollars. In short, the standard of living has improved: 95% of Americans now living below the poverty line have not only electricity and running water but also Internet access, a refrigerator and a television—luxuries that Andrew Carnegie's millions couldn't have bought at any price a century ago."

"Predictions of a rosy future have a way of sounding as unrealistic as end-is-nigh forecasts. But Messrs. Diamandis and Kotler are not just dreamers. They lay out a plausible road map, discussing, among other things, the benefits of do-it-yourself tinkering—like the work by geneticist J. Craig Venter in beating the U.S. government in the race to sequence the human genome—and the growing willingness of techno-philanthropists like Bill Gates to tackle real-world problems.

The biggest hurdles, however, are not scientific or technological but political. There are still too many corrupt dictators and backward-looking governments keeping millions in penury. But as we have seen lately, the misruled have a way of throwing off despotic governments. With ever more people reaching for freedom, countless millions are tacitly embracing the Diamandis motto: "The best way to predict the future is to create it yourself.""

Another book coming out now with a similar theme is The Coming Prosperity: How Entrepreneurs Are Transforming the Global Economy by Philip Auerswald.

Does high social class lead to unethical behaviors?

See New Studies Determine Which Social Class More Likely to Behave Unethically from the National Science Foundation. Excerpts are below but George Mason University economist Tyler Cowen had some interesting counterpoints. See How good are the upper classes?

"A series of studies conducted by psychologists at the University of California, Berkeley and the University of Toronto in Canada reveal something the well off may not want to hear. Individuals who are relatively high in social class are more likely to engage in a variety of unethical behaviors.

That is the finding of new research published in today's Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences and it's a doozy.

"Our studies suggest that more positive attitudes toward greed and the pursuit of self-interest among upper-class individuals, in part, drive their tendencies toward increased unethical behavior," said lead researcher Paul Piff of UC Berkeley."

"Participants then played a "game of chance" in which a computer "randomly" presented them with one side of a six-sided die on five separate rolls. Researchers told participants higher rolls would increase their chances of winning a cash prize and were asked to report their total score at the end of the game. In fact, die rolls were pre-determined to sum up to 12. The extent to which participants reported a total exceeding 12 served as a direct behavioral measure of cheating.

Greed "is a robust determinant of unethical behavior," the researchers write in the report. "Plato and Aristotle deemed greed to be at the root of personal immorality, arguing that greed drives desires for material gain at the expense of ethical standards." For this study, the researchers conclude that, in part, due to their more favorable beliefs about greed, upper-class individuals are more willing to deceive and cheat others for personal gain."

(Hat Tip: Bruce Norton)

Sale Of The Nike All-Star Collection Sneakers Causes A Riot

See Riot erupts at Florida Mall during Nike All Star collection sneaker release event. Excerpt:

"A riot erupted late Thursday night at the Florida Mall as hundreds of people became disordelry vying to buy special NBA All Star sneakers at a special event at the Foot Locker. It was so bad police with riot shields and on horseback had to be called in."

"The full name of the sneakers is the Foamposite One Galaxy. It has a constellation-like print with a glow-in-the-dark sole and they were set to go on sale for the first time in stores at midnight Thursday at a retail price of $220.00. One thing that may have led to the increased demand at the store is that Nike decided not to sell the shoes online."

It seems like even $220 is below the equilibrium price if the quantity demanded is greater than the quantity supplied (at least on the first day or two). Perhaps part of what people are buying is being first. So any time price is too low you get a shortage and some other allocation method besides price takes over (like waiting in line).

If stores are so concerned about safety, they should consider selling it at a much higher price on the first day (with things like Play Stations, they end up getting sold for much more than the retail price on eBay very soon after the first day anyway). If some people object to such a high price or claim gouging, the store can remind people that they are trying to keep the peace and keep consumers safe. They could also pledge to donate some of the extra profit to charity. That could create some good will.

Back in 2006, police officers were allowed to go to the head of the line when the Play Station 3 came out. See If Prices Are Not Used, Other Allocation Methods Emerge: Police Officers Get PS3's First

See also How to Stop the PlayStation Violence

What’s an Oscar Really Worth?

Click here to read this CNBC article by Julia Boorstin. Excerpt:

"Oscar winners bring in 7.6 percent higher box office return on average than nominees that don’t win, according to IBIS world. On average, winners of Best Picture earned 57 percent of their total revenue before the nominees were announced, 27 percent once they were nominated and more than 15 percent after winning an Oscar. Nominees that didn’t bring home the gold earn just 5 percent of their total take after the awards show."

That means that, for example, “Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close,” which has grossed $31 million so far (not very much by Hollywood standards), would end up making about $36.5 million if it wins and $32.6 if it does not. So about an extra $4 million at stake.

It is not quite clear to me if those percentages are right. For winners we have 57 + 27 + 15 = 99, which is pretty close to 100% and it could just be a rounding issue. But for losers, it only adds up to 89%. Since they only get 5% after the awards show, the earlier numbers have to be higher than 57 and 27. If the earlier 95% has a 57/27 ratio, it would be something like 64% and 31%.

The article also discusses the economics of the cost of ads and ratings issues.

Struggling Cities Turn to a Crop for Cash

Click here to read this New York Times article by Michael Cooper. The crop is marijuana. Excerpt:

"As the stubborn economic downturn has forced this city to take painful steps to balance its budget in recent years, it has increasingly turned to one of its newer industries to raise much-needed revenues: medical marijuana dispensaries.

The city has raised taxes on marijuana dispensaries several times in the past few years, and last year it collected $1.4 million in taxes from them — nearly 3 percent of all the business taxes it collected. Now Oakland plans to double the number of dispensaries it licenses, to eight from the current four, in the hopes that it can collect even more revenue.

“This is general fund revenue — it all goes into the melting pot,” said David McPherson, the city’s tax and revenue administrator. “When you’re making decisions about what to continue keeping or not, it goes into that decision process. If you don’t have that money, then you’re making other decisions about ‘Are we going to close the libraries on Monday?’ ‘Are you going to end up cutting a cop?’ ‘Are you not giving funds to our arts and things that help our kids?’ ”

Sometimes lost in the discussion of medical marijuana is the extent to which it has become a small but growing source of new tax collections for cities and states that have been struggling to balance their budgets for more than four years now."

It could be that cities have recognized that the demand for marijuana is inelastic. When government taxes products like this they tend to get more revenue than if the tax products with elastic demand (the more elastic the demand the more quantity demanded changes when price changes).

Click here to see a simple, graphical explanation of what is going on

Click here to read a paper on this topic by Harvard economist Jeffrey Miron. He found that the elasticity for marijuana is -0.5. When it is less than 1 in absolute value, it is said to be inelastic. It means that if price goes up 10% quantity demanded only goes down 5%.