Reading Analysis #6 "The Case of Contamination" (10/16/2011)

A)
It is not a surprise that people want to globalize while not losing their cultural identity. However, a society cannot pick and chose which elements to assimilate into their culture, globalization must be embrace as a whole- for its net benefits and net costs. Appiah addresses an interesting paradox "....Globalization can produce homogeneity. But Globalization is also a threat to homogeneity". However, societies respond to the homogeneity globalization produces by inventing new forms of difference. He also makes an extremely counter intuitive argument that cultures can and will flourish with globalization. He uses the example of globally watched television series. Unlike what many people think, empirical evidence shows that these global television shows do not impress foreign values/concepts on cultures. In fact each culture pulls different lessons from the same exact show to relate to their own culture.

B)

1. What elements of American culture have been influenced by globalization?
2. What is the difference between cosmopolitans and neofundamentalists?
3. Evaluate this argument: I think that it is true that a globalize persons somehow tends to loose part of their culture. (I argue this way since I live in China for 14 months and now I have come to the USA and I have been loosing things from my culture and getting used to new trends)

C)
This article explains the different effects of globalization on different cultures. It also defends globalization against claims that is destroys cultures, and moves us to toward homogeneity.

EWOT Googles #6 "Do we really care about poverty? (Unintended Consequences)" (10/16/2011)

Poverty!

One of the most using words in essays and on today's day to day conversation. Everyone talks about poverty and relates many things to it. Today while I was walking outside The Pit and I had a portion of my food left over. One of friends mention to me "Don't think about throwing it away since there is people dieng in Africa because of hunger". Now this is one of the hundreds of examples I can give you to demonstrate you how poverty is a very common topic in the 21st century.

This will make anybody think that the world is become more aware about his problem with the pass of time and that eventually one day this will end. Rizzo argue that in the past 40 years poverty has decreased substantially. So I few hours ago I was just seraching random stuff in the web and I saw something interesting. A innovator Italian came up with a new business call "Wally", which is a new line of the most luxurious and expensive yachts every design. Luca Basani, the founder, now makes millions of dollars designing yachts to extremely rich people around the world. "Wally Why", one of the biggest boats ever design by Luca and the company named Hermes. Now this design is called why since it reflects the question "Why would I buy this?". The price for this boat is unimaginable and still people will look for it. This example and many others demonstrate how there is people in these world that do not know how to spent their money. If you look up in Google "Funny ways to spent money" you will be surprise in how people spent their money.

So all this huge innovators came out of business schools where they where thought to be innovators and great business man. Schools and governments have promoted the innovation in order to create a new generation of business man. Their consequences might be to have a better economy of successful persons. However they do not see that they create innovators who will later become so rich and self-interested they will spent their money in ridiculous ways forgetting about trying to help. We want a new generation of business man and we end up with 10 new millionaries spending their money on themselves. The creations of a self-interested generation.
Now I leave this for comments. Do people really care about poverty? Unintended consequences.

Class #18 "Market Transactions" (10/14/2011)

Market Transactions generally create positive sum outcomes, since both parties benefit.
Markets are often wrong for two main reasons:

1. The "Lack of Markets" from externalities, information problems, and market power. 
2. Institutions matter, and they play a role in the efficiency of markets. 

Efficiency

• What people want
• Lowest price possible 

Institutions are critical:

• The Rule of Law
• Laws apply equally to everyone
• Laws should not be arbitrary

Inflation

• Every price goes up across the market
• Caused due to a increase in the amount of money for the same amounts of goods. 

-Rizzo

Daniel Gaona

Lecture #17 "Unintended Consequences" (10/12/2011)

During this lecture several examples of unintended consequences were mention. However, the Law of Unintended Consequences mas also mention.

Example:
The British navy was placed off the coast of Africa to halt all slave trading. This had the unintended consequence of making conditions even worse for slaves as slaves traders cramped them into even smaller cargo holds that were disguised so the navy could not see them

When simple rules have the objective to regulate or control complex systems, you will obtain unintended consequences; any group of people making decisions are going to have a problem when they have limited information, short time horizons, little feedback and misleading incentives.

Another scenario is when regulations push against incentives, incentives tend to push back.
Example: Disability Act - Employment of disable people drastically decreased because the cost of hiring someone disable was higher than before.

Other Key points:

• Trade between individuals and countries is not zero sum
• Pie Fallacy: Thinking there is a fixed amount of wealth in the world. 

-Rizzo 

Daniel Gaona