I can go the distance.

Recent F&M grad, EMT, rower.

[becausebirds]

Penguins: clumsy but adorable.

[dreaming-jaybird]

i never wanted this to end

[ofgeography]

oh my god those are ROCKS the penguins are falling on ROCKS are you OKAY PENGUINS do you need WINGPADS OR SOME OTHER KIND OF SHOCK ABSORBING PROTECTIVE BODY GEAR

[bighonkinqueeniesbadbadbackstory]

Fun fact, due to their flightlessness, penguins have actually extremely sturdy bones for birds. That plus their natural blubbery body makes them their own shock absorbers

[mvnyrx]

F

[ayoaprell]

All my life, I never knew I was a penguin

[fuks]

[deleted-deleted-byyyyeeee-deact]

I love the sound of the innocent laughing.

[soflobrat]

😂😂

[thedarkestlovee]

This is what I imagine having children is like

[fatherofthebride]

is that a property brother

[221cbakerstreet]

It was

[lucyvallely]

View this post on Instagram

Do you remember the 21st night of September?

[wereyoulookingforsomething-deac]

theyre so good holy shit

the nuances in the movement

the two dancers who are in the center

they have no inhibitions

they have no problems in life

what is this

why is this the happiest video i have ever seen?

[milkeu]

View this post on Instagram

big + little

[tastefullyoffensive]

(via huskie_on_ice)

[awesome-picz]

[economistsdoitwithmodels]

I feel like this is the least offensive “economist in hell” joke possible among a wide variety of possibilities.

[fag]

[theinturnetexplorer]

Hide and Seek

[mankillercalledbunny]

Cat Camouflage

[sprinkled-with-sass]

catouflage

[kasueli]

why would someone reblog a photoset of everyday household things? so boring

[handcuffs-and-football]

@smollto

[technicolourunicorn]

Like… Did Reese Witherspoon literally have a baby with herself?

[mainelymoose]

So we can all agree that Reese Witherspoon has mastered cloning, yeah?

[sashayed]

[homotology]

:D

[ryanreynoldssource]

[nikolaskamarov-blog]

[slayersublime]

[becausebirds]

Penguins: clumsy but adorable.

[dreaming-jaybird]

i never wanted this to end

[ofgeography]

oh my god those are ROCKS the penguins are falling on ROCKS are you OKAY PENGUINS do you need WINGPADS OR SOME OTHER KIND OF SHOCK ABSORBING PROTECTIVE BODY GEAR

[bighonkinqueeniesbadbadbackstory]

Fun fact, due to their flightlessness, penguins have actually extremely sturdy bones for birds. That plus their natural blubbery body makes them their own shock absorbers

[wittyemt]

An answer to an econ question

First I’m going to say that this post is like absolutely nothing that I have reblogged.  It’s probably one of 3? original posts that I have ever blogged.  It concerns basic economic principles and wealth/income inequality.  Don’t read if it doesn’t interest you.  

2 days ago, Hank Green aka edwardspoonhands asked a question that you can find here.  My answer/reply is incredibly long so I’ve just posted it instead.

Hi Hank!

Recent grad(B.A) with a major in econ here!  As others have likely told you already, parts of your question have been studied and can be ‘explained’ by orthodox economic theory.  I split my answer to your post into 2 parts.  The first is theoretical and explains some background and the second being how the equilibrium price of the basket of goods to which you are referring (‘package’) influences the socioeconomic status and power of the various income classes.

Part 1.

From what I understand of your question, the feedback loop to which you are referring is characterized by the equation or phrase, Marginal Revenue= Marginal Cost (MR=MC).  The short explanation of this is that if MR>MC, then more firms will enter the market and produce more of the good, driving Price down until MR=MC.  If MR<MC, then firms that cannot break even will be forced to leave the market and Price will rise until MC=MR. The price will adjust according to the relevant supply and demand functions.  Of course the above will only take place in a market with perfect competition, which assumes free entry/exit, perfect information, and homogenous goods.  The above equilibrium will determine the final market price of a good.

The basket of goods to which you are referring is NOT the CPI.  The CPI is A basket of goods in which the price is tracked from year to year to measure inflation.  It does NOT represent a basket of goods that a person needs to receive to feel like they are worthwhile.  (I’m adding this in because of some answers that you’ve posted)

           Your assumption that everyone’s ‘package’ will vary is supported by economic theory.  Modern economic theory uses a Utility theory of value (as opposed to a Labor theory of value).  This means that value is determined by how much pleasure we receive from it.  Since no two people receive the same amount of utility from a good, everyone’s package of goods they feel they must have is different.  

           Finally, people of different income levels have differing marginal propensities to consume (MPCs).  Those with lower income levels have a higher MPC because they must buy their ‘package’ and as you noted, this leaves them with less remaining money to spend elsewhere.  Those with higher incomes are not forced to spend a large percentage of their income on their basic ‘package’.

*I used orthodox economic theory (Keynes and Neoclassicism) as my logic in the above.  There are numerous heterodox theories that approach the above in other ways.

Part 2

           The real meat of your question actually does not have that much research that I could find.  But your logic to me is sound.  Less extra income to consume does leave those in the lower income classes less market power.  This can be considered a big disadvantage.  While some can argue that extra spending money does not effect one’s ability to climb the socioeconomic ladder, it is hard to argue that a candidate that walks into an interview sharply dressed in a nice, well fitted suit will have an advantage over his poorer counterpart who cannot afford to dress the same way.  Another example is that of a simple investment account.  Those with higher incomes can have an account or financial advisor, invest more and get even more extra income off of those investments giving them even greater wealth.

           Thus the argument that the previously described situation increases the wealth gap is a sound argument to make.  However, it is important to note that there are many explanations for the widening wealth inequality.  For example, as international trade has become more liberalized, inequality has risen in almost all developed countries.  Economists explain this via the Hecksher-Ohlin/Stopler Samuleson model of international trade.  I won’t go into more detail here because I could go on for pages and pages.

I will say that there are many holes in the study of economics, and that no economist ever truly agrees with another economist.  So it is likely that there will not be a widely agreed upon fix to the wealth gap anytime in the near future.

*I use the term wealth instead of income because income is a flow variable while wealth is fixed.  I find it more logical to use the fixed variable.

I hope that this clears stuff up. I should point out that I only have a B.A. and as such there are people out there who are far more educated on this topic than I.

[chylerwest-deactivated20140722]

[curiouslybisexual]

this is the best pun in tv history but oh my gosh the feels