Ch 2 blog

Do electric cars have enough drive to go mainstream?
http://www.cnn.com/2010/TECH/innovation/10/26/electric.cars/index.html

Summary:

Major car manufacturer are preparing to launch their electric car models (THINK City car) and expectation are so high that Nissan has announced that it will close its U.S waiting list at 20,000 pre-orders. The vehicle run on zero carbon emissions and running cost less than a quarter of the conventional vehicles. However, despite environmental advantages the vehicle is restricted to only traveling 70 miles per charge and has a top speed of 70 miles per hour. Many car manufacturer and ardent supporters claim that the electric car is not ready to replace the primary car because the distance that the car can travel needs to double or triple and the cost needs to come down before it can replace the primary car. Currently the cars are not cheap; the THINK car price tag in the U.S is around $25,280 after federal tax savings. (The price in each country depends on government incentives) The growth of electric cars really depends on the speed at which governments build the infrastructure for charging them in city centers, as well as the price, range, and performance of the cars themselves. Currently, only a hand full of cities in Europe even supports the THINK car and hopefully many cites around the world will soon follow this trend.

Connection:

This article connects with Chapter 2 in the sense that it expresses the high demand for electric car resulting in an increase in demand. This increase is cause by tastes and preferences because the vehicle is very efficient on carbon emissions. Another factor affecting demand is the change in price of complementary products. The vehicles are electrically charge therefore the running cost are cheap compare to the running cost of conventional cars because of this, people may turn to electric cars for this benefit. Therefore, an increase in demand results in an increase of prices and increase of quantity exchange. The electric cars are elastic. It is because there are many methods of transportation and many substitute products.

Reflection:

I believe the electric cars will start to become a trend in the time to come because they have not even advertised the product and it is ready popular among many people around the world. Today everyone is so concern about global warming that everyone is chipping in to help stop it. As well as “most manufacturers are still dipping their toes in the water.” (Developing better electric cars/more efficient) I also believe the increase in demand for electric cars will have a great affect on the market for conventional cars and the prices of gas. Because of the rising popularity of the electric cars, suppliers will eventually produce more electric cars than the conventional cars. As a Result, gas price will drop because it is a complementary product to the conventional cars. Nevertheless, it will be a long time before this event happens or if it does even happens. . . .

eco12

Is $1 billion G-20 summit worth it?
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/06/25/g20.g8.summits/index.html?iref=allsearch
Summary:
Was spending more than $1 billion worth the G-20 summit in Canada? At such a hefty price tag it’s reasonable to ponder whether the meeting was worth it. According to officials, “it has ready paid itself because China has ready announce the strengthening of its currency, which is good for the US and other countries.” The summit is supposed to be an opportunity for the top 19 economies in the world and the European Union to discuss about world problems. However, the main topic of discussion in this particular meet is more focus on the macroeconomic needs. With the G-20 nations control more than 85% of the world GDP, what they discuss and decide will have an important impact on the global economy.

Connection

The connection that seem very obvious to me is the concept direct cost/opportunity cost. At the cost of over a $1 billion (direct cost) we lose an opportunity cost associated with this decision. Because every decision carries with it an opportunity cost, since in order to do one thing, something else must be sacrifice. In doing so we can’t use this money for other proposes like help homeless people in Canada, or improve our school education system. Another connection I made was that to scarcity. Scarcity is referring to anything that is available only in a limited supply. Money is definitely a limited supple. As Dr. Evil learned in the Austin Powers movies, $1 billion isn’t quite what it used to be. And the Canadian government seems to agree with that statement.

Reflection

It seems like the government is enjoying spending money. With over $1 billion price tag for the summit, I personally think that is way off the charts. Compare to the Winter Olympics 16 day budget of $1.8 billion for everyone in the British Columbia regions, its ridicules that the government spend over $1 billion for less than 100 people in only 10 days. However, even with all this bashing, I think I understand why they used all that money. If I had to guest why, it would be to kick start the economy. Canada has made great effort to advertise its country to attract/influence tourists to visit Canada. So in spending all this money we get the economy started. Similar, to what the united states are doing right now. (I could be wrong)