Monday, November 30, 2009
Sunday, November 29, 2009
P < AVC
Thanks to econ prof Linda Ghent for sending this along.NY apple growers leaving more fruit on trees
New York's apple orchards are being carpeted with red as unpicked apples drop to the ground.
With the best of the crop off to market, growers say this year it's cheaper to leave leftovers on the trees than to pick and sell them for juice....
One reason is an abundant crop, not only in New York but in neighboring Pennsylvania and nearby Michigan, which has produced more second-tier fruit than juice and applesauce makers need and driven down market prices.
When labor and transportation costs are factored in, selling anything but the cream of the crop for the supermarket can become a losing proposition.
"In some cases it's not worth the bother of picking them off the tree," said Peter Gregg, spokesman for the New York Apple Association.
The difference in prices is the biggest one-year swing some have ever seen. Last year, growers hurt by severe hailstorms were getting an above-average 12-18 cents per pound for processing apples, those sold for sauce and slices. The price is about 5-8 cents this year.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Friday, November 27, 2009
Is a Tobin Tax feasible?
In his column today, Paul Krugman raises and then dismisses this issue as follows:
On the claim that financial transactions can’t be taxed: modern trading is a highly centralized affair. Take, for example, Tobin’s original proposal to tax foreign exchange trades. How can you do this, when currency traders are located all over the world? The answer is, while traders are all over the place, a majority of their transactions are settled — i.e., payment is made — at a single London-based institution. This centralization keeps the cost of transactions low, which is what makes the huge volume of wheeling and dealing possible. It also, however, makes these transactions relatively easy to identify and tax.This passage left me scratching my head. Even if most transactions are now settled in one place, that need not be the case in the future after a significant change in the policy environment. It is not as if London has some large, natural comparative advantage in financial settlement that would persist despite a tax on transactions there. The finance industry is set up to take advantage of very small price differences. If London became ever so slightly more expensive, wouldn't contracting and settlement quickly migrate elsewhere?
Update: NYU finance prof Aswath Damodaran reaches similar conclusions.
