Teaching Economics with Media
Jim Hacker faces political pressure as he tries to implement a smoking ban through increased taxes and advertising restrictions. While he presents the policy as a health measure, Sir Humphrey challenges him with the government’s financial dependence on tobacco tax revenue. The result is a witty back-and-forth weighing public health externalities against fiscal incentives.
Thanks to Charlie Ben-Nathan for the clip suggestin!
In this clip from Parks and Recreation, newly elected city councilwoman Leslie Knope proposes a soda tax to combat the city’s rising obesity rates. Shocked by the absurdly large drink sizes sold in town, Leslie pushes for government intervention through taxation to promote healthier choices. Her proposal will eventually spark pushback from the beverage industry and some constituents.
This scene is a great way to introduce Pigouvian taxes, which are taxes designed to correct for negative externalities. Leslie’s soda tax targets the societal costs of obesity by attempting to reduce the consumption of unhealthy goods.
Negative externalities are activities that generate costs that accrue to people not directly involved in those activities. These effects are generally unattended. From the pipe smoker’s point of view, the noise generated by the rowdy boys was an external cost.
The global positioning system (GPS) was originally developed for military purposes but has been made available to private companies since 2000. Allowing private companies to build new products and services using this technology has resulted in a massive increase in technological advancement in the US that provides significantly more economic benefit than the cost of operating the GPS system. Estimates place the value of GPS at $1.4 trillion from 1980 to 2019, but the federal government spends relatively little to operate the system.
Whenever an action creates a negative externality, the private individual allocates too many resources toward the production of that item. This happens because the producer is focused on their own profit maximization problem and is not accounting for any external costs associated with production. When it comes to meat packing or factory farming, producers don’t take into account the external costs of pollution or the potential risk of bacterial infection. Regulating such industries can mandate that firms take into account the social costs of production rather than the private cost of production.
Larry David is adamant about the unwritten rule of appetizer allotment. In this scene, Richard Lewis is also eating “too much” of the hummus that they have ordered to share. The “unwritten rule” is that the dish should be split evenly among the diners, but there is a strong personal incentive to eat more than your share. In a sense, this is similar to the tragedy of the commons. While it’s in the best interest of the group to split the resource fairly, some people may try to take advantage of the situation.
Thanks to Alex Marsella for the clip recommendation!
Individuals often make decisions that are in their own best interest, and often disregard the impact they may have on other people. Whenever this happens, individuals are creating an externality. Someone else either benefits or is harmed by that outcome. In the case of someone putting on deodorant, that could have spillover benefits from people getting to smell a “fresh scent.” If too much is applied, it could annoy others are turn to a negative externality.
This Turkish Airways ad shows the value of network externalities to a market. A network effect occurs when the value of a product or service depends on the number of users. Network effects are typically positive, such that the more people using the product, the more valuable the product becomes. Airlines are an example of network effects, as the ad points out, because the more places they fly, the more valuable the flights are to the people purchasing the tickets.
Tony joins his colleagues for lunch at a local pub to discuss potential leads for their newspaper, but he’s disturbed by a gentleman loudly munching on chips behind him. The man appears to be ignorant of the external costs he’s imposing on those around him and is focused on only his own satisfaction.
When people are unaware of the external costs they are imposing on others, they tend to overconsume, literally. Since there aren’t clear property rights, it’s not clear who should make the determination of appropriate volume. Tony could pay the man to stop eating his chips, but Tony may argue that the man should have to pay for the right to eat his chips so loudly. It’s harder to reach a solution without clearly defined property rights.
Thanks to Sheena Murray for introducing me to this show. She submitted a different clip from the show, but I looked up the wrong episode and happened to find this clip instead.
There appears to be a coverup of contamination of the local water supply by PG&E, but the impacts are becoming more visible. In this scene, Ed Masry meets with a PG&E lawyer to “negotiate” a settlement for damages causes by the contamination. While PG&E may not have believe their dumping was causing externalities, it appears that they may have imposed serious external costs on the region. One of the concerns of litigation of this sort involves determining the appropriate value of the reduced quality of life resulting from these external costs.
Thanks to Dawn Renninger for the clip suggestion!