Negative externalities | Consumer and producer surplus | Microeconomics | Khan Academy

[@StephenDeagle]

I enjoy Slavoj Zizek's take on externalities and environmental disaster: "This readiness to assume the guilt for the threats to our environment is deceptively reassuring: We like to be guilty since, if we are guilty, it all depends on us. We pull the strings of the catastrophe, so we can also save ourselves simply by changing our lives. What is really hard for us (at least in the West) to accept is that we are reduced to the role of a passive observer who sits and watches what our fate will be."

[@MrSupernova111]

This reminds me of the argument of minimum wage. On one side the employers claim that they can not turn a profit if minimum wage is raised and will lead to unemployment. On the other hand, something like half of the population is on some type of welfare because most of them do not earn enough to make a living. So the government, the taxpayer, must pick up the rest of the tab to provide lose income people with enough money to pay for housing, food, transportation, etc... Very interesting subject. Great job with the video.

[@markgao8481]

It is him again!! If he did math and physics together I may understand cuz that two subjects are closely related. But he's doing Econ as well!!!!!!

[@IAmNotABot9]

And he also does history and biology.

[@concernedcitizen3476]

Thank you ..you explained it in two seconds.

[@amrit9302]

Actually.. 5:59 minutes bruhh...

[@seagertp]

Khan likely uses the term "opportunity costs" to emphasize the idea of inefficient allocation of resources. That is, the economy could have done something else with the capital, energy, materials, and labor that were required to produce those bags. Whatever that other thing is (like make straws for your drink at your favorite movie?), society would enjoy that other thing more. That's what he means by "inefficient" in this case, that the resources could have been applied to something better.

[@seagertp]

Opportunity costs are the value of a lost opportunity. For example, lets say you win a free ticket to the movies at a 14-screen Cineplex. You can only see one movie. When you choose to see your favorite movie, the ticket "costs" you nothing, but the opportunity cost is that you don't get the enjoyment of seeing your second favorite movie. In this video, Khan doesn't have to say "opportunity costs". He could just say, "the bags cost 1 cent" and his point would remain the same.

[@lanniu8435]

THANK YOU!!!

[@MirekBujnovsky]

I have been a tax professional for 18 years. The problem with taxation is that taxes have to be clearly defined to be enforceable. Once defined, taxpayers, ALL taxpayers, are financially rewarded for innovating away from the tax, often defeating the purpose of the tax. Taxation is good for raising revenues. It is typically not very good at controlling behavior in the ways we want.

[@sachinthambyrajah5858]

Thank you! This really helped

[@pariss9983]

Thank you! I finally understood it

[@MaxHarms]

The idea at the end is only one possible solution. Instead of somehow raising the price of bags (presumably through a tax), it's also possible to have consumers recognize the added costs and thereby reduce the demand curve by that 2cents. Any combination of increasing explicit costs and reducing demand is also a solution. Taxation might be optimal, but it's not mandatory.

[@MirekBujnovsky]

Taxation is rarely optimal, as it is difficult to monitor that desired impact of the taxation. If you tax plastic bags and everyone switches to some other product to avoid the tax, the other product may be even worse. Regulation is easier to monitor, but discourages innovation. Enforcement of property rights is better theoretically, but difficult to enforce in fact. Of the three, I would say taxation is the least efficient.

[@polvotierno]

Could you do a video applying the idea of a negative externality to wages that don't cover private and social costs of labor?... Then people would understand that wages have to rise for the benefit of society as a whole.

[@GenghisVern]

That's a good point. It also points to the strange situation using "sin taxes". Cigarettes for instance... if government comes to depend on cigarette sales for revenue, where's the real incentive to reduce smoking? Severance and pollution however, these are inescapable as all production depends on them. Also, extraction and land are arguable privileges over the Commons, something for which the people should be compensated. ???

[@MISSBOSS3965]

What program do you use to draw the graph.

[@spencerrogovin9555]

this man was sent from a higher being

[@MirekBujnovsky]

Negative externalities can be corrected by taxation, regulation or enforcement of property rights. That's an entirely different discussion requiring much more than 10 seconds.

[@Shibamobobo]

I burst out laughing when he said animals choking on plastic bags...then I felt absolutely horrible when I imagine turtles choking on plastic bags :( poor turtles...

[@mandy1339]

How does one guy know so many subjects?? someone please explain

[@tearitup3337]

He gets requests for certain videos, he then go researches the subject, the re illustrates it in his own words to make it easier to learn

[@seivorsichtig]

and it's probably not just one guy behind this youtube channel, even though its only him that speaks in the videos.

[@r.9447]

Luna Kiwatila idk about now but he used to be the only one researching about all the topics and explaining it by himself. So I think if it's a video of him talking then he studied everything about the topic and is explaining it

[@phymath-jisanislam9639]

by reading books .

[@rigoguzman1138]

Simple!!! Thanks

[@operationsusfoods1354]

I still dont get this shi 😂😂😂😂😂

[@leopoldomazzetti7413]

JaLyn Lewis this comment is the kinda reassuring things I look for when watching this stuff 😫😫

[@ananyasahu9399]

Wait, this was so simple 🙄

[@TTL1212]

thanks a lot

[@danaelona4081]

Hello,my question is more like supply and demand both shift to thw left. So the price stays the same ultimately. The question asks what point is the social optimum at, in this situation? Would this mean that there is no social optimum bc the price stays the same?? Need help...

[@Yaelia]

thank you!

[@patronusstag]

Is this the same as the effect of a tax on the graph?

[@kohumtyko]

did u ever figure this out, trying to learn that rn. say if a 1 cent tax was added to the graph.

[@luismiguellm]

what program do you use to illustrate the examples. Thank you

[@ThePeterDislikeShow]

For COVID, could a sin tax work? E.g., we could allow dining in restaurants, but apply a sin tax. Or perhaps a sin tax on gasoline or airline tickets to discourage travel during this time.

[@GenghisVern]

a tax shift from labor toward land, severance and pollution taxes would internalize these costs

[@TyArdoin]

Negatie externality

[@xcvsdxvsx]

saul for benevolent emperor 2012

[@greatPJ]

Good video. But wouldn't you need to also calculate the positive externalities and compare them with the negative externalities? Because while it is clear that society will be hurt as a result of the bags (those poor drowning turtles...), it is equally clear that society will also be benefited in certain ways from the bags. Hence, it would be necessarily to compare the two, and then take the difference--whether positive or negative--and put that onto the graph (instead of just the negative externality number). Right?

[@otter4596]

An externality is one that effects a third party that is not part of the transaction. I don't think that me having a plastic bag is going to have a positive effect on anyone but me, for example.

[@xcvsdxvsx]

@polvotierno these costs are considered by those who apply for jobs at these institutions. in a free market society capitalists are in competition for available labor, and the wage that they can get away with paying are dependent upon these conditions. check out this great little video for a more detailed explanation of why wage controls damage society /watch?v=IFbYM2EDz40&feature=g-all-f&context=G27f7289FAAAAAAAAXAA

[@yoometh]

the video shouldve been 10seconds longer so you couldve said tax on the dead weoght loss

[@walidwa4621]

😀😀

[@hudsonbarth5641]

PLAAASSSTICC.......BAG IN THE SEAAAAAAA!!!!

[@710418oo]

Not useful for IB program

[@peterchen8101]

haha test tomozz

[@connermcanally340]

peter chen how did it go

[@surajpadhiyar3528]

Thank you.👍