An after-service buffet? These folks must be Presbyterian.

I also see that Roger slyly mixes Freud with Jung.

Great post.

Kevin

Or Episcopalian.

We love us our covered dishes!

Mark,

I’ve been meaning to say that I’ve thoroughly enjoyed your posts on illegal immigration. They’re helping me to sort out the issues in my own mind.

My own regret is that I have a total lack of background in economics, so I have no way to assess the strengths and weaknesses of economic arguments.

Can you point me to some decent online resources that teach economics in a clear, “Econ for Dummies” way to those of us lacking even the basics? When you talk econ with your HS students, what text(s) do you use?

Kevin

I’m glad you bring up the whole Freud/Jung thing. I intentionally went with Freud (although the reference is wrong) because I liked the sound of the phrase better than “Jungian figment.”

It is fiction afterall…

AUHOR: smallholder
Kevin,

For AP Econ we use McConnell-Bue. For a quick survey, I wouldn’t recommend it because it requires a fair amount of math and graphing.

For a quick, highly readable, entertaining look at how to apply the reasoning principals of economics to everyday life, I recommend “Freakonomics” by Stephen Levitt. He doesn’t deal with traditional economic topics, but the book demonstrates how an economist thinks. I assign it as summer reading for AP Econ and as an optional reading fore AP US.

In AP US history we address economic concepts as they come up, and largely what I do is demonstrate to the kids how one quick line in the textbook influences the whole economy - my emphasis is on “macro” economics. I am quite frustrated that Americans are largely clueless about the interrelationship of the economy. All the anti-illegal immigration economic “statistics” deal only with direct costs as if there were no indirect influences on the economy (interestingly, those very same people are also usually pro-tax cut because of the indirect influences of that policy - syncretism that is probably based more on partisanship than any realization that their positions are self-condradictory).

I saw an example of American economic illiteracy this weekend. In New Jersey it is illegal to pump your own gas. The sole purpose of the law is to protect pump jockeys’ jobs. People don’t seem to realize that the additional cost of pump jockey wages are reflected in their gas prices - one person told me that the costs couldn’t be reflected because New Jersey’s gas prices were lower than New York’s, as if there weren’t other price factors like New York’s state taxes. The low-wage pretroleum transfer engineer jobs preserved by the law probably result in the net loss of total jobs. If gas prices were fractionally lower, people would spend less on gas - Say a savings of eight cents per gallon over 1000 gallons a year would mean an additional $80 in consumer buying power. If people went out to eat just two more times per year, or bought six more CDs or went to the movies eight more times, in aggregate (counting all the consumers in New Jersey), there would be a spike in consumer demand, resulting in the creation of more jobs. But people don’t think that way. And if they don’t think that way when it comes to low-outrage issues like gas pumping, it is even harder for people to think economically on a charged issue like immigration.