Taking environmental and resource economics in college, these videos are awesome! Thank you guys for making economics entertaining. I really appreciate the quizzes, lol!
@seppschulz8 жыл бұрын
Greets from Germany, you guys are helping me loads (Y)
@MarginalRevolutionUniversity8 жыл бұрын
Glad to hear it, Joseph! :) - Meg
@mariaaguilar61046 жыл бұрын
Increíble, muchas páginas incomprensibles resumidas en algo tan simple. Muchas gracias, ciertamente las personas que aman lo que hacen realmente pueden transmitir con facilidad sus ideas.
@trentizaiah64983 жыл бұрын
Instablaster.
@user-is2pe8sv4e Жыл бұрын
you guys are life savers
@Robbythegod5 жыл бұрын
The Pollution vs Flu shot argument is flawed. In the first case, you are actively taking an action that will cause others harm (polluting) in the second case, it is the lack of action that causes others harm (not getting a flu shot). If I want to start doing something I must first consider who it will affect and compensate any people who will be harmed. You don't choose to get the flu, the choice is to prevent yourself from getting the flu, so the harmful action is not your own.
@danperez75485 жыл бұрын
But in his example, he meant that as people we are aware that not getting a flu shot will probably result in causing harm to our surroundings, which makes this non-action "punishable". As you said, it is true that you don't choose to get the flu, but you are very aware that there is a probability of infecting people if you don't take the shot (which leads to a ripple effect of disease spread). Although this probability is not very quantifiable, as well as the factory's unclear externalities, such opaque properties make the example worthwhile. If public policy made it mandatory for everyone to get a shot, opting out of that standard would imply taxes or fines for those not taking the shot. Hence, drawing this parallel helps him define property rights as a right to clean air and population health, and the opacity extent to which it is hard and time-consuming to find an agreement in either case.
@bijeshgyawali94474 жыл бұрын
@Robert I think what he meant is in a world of transaction costs and externalities, welfare is maximized if the property right is assigned to the party with a higher cost of reducing the externality.
@georgearias95843 жыл бұрын
Unless you're locked in doors, you do "choose" to go outside and put yourself in a position where you are at higher risk of getting the flu. Further, once you have the flu, you do choose to still be around others and consequently create the circumstances that allow you to sneeze on someone (as opposed to sneezing at home). Either way, he wasn't saying that the cases entirely mirror each other. The purpose of that illustration was to point out that property rights and liabilities are sometimes not clearly defined by the law, and this leads to higher transaction costs and market failures.
@movieman18276 жыл бұрын
Greets from India! Thanks a lot for the video
@Seregolas9 жыл бұрын
thank you for the video. it helped me quite a lot!
@zuggrr3 жыл бұрын
This is such a beautiful concept
@TravisTerrell6 жыл бұрын
Semi-related: My insurance company pays me $25 to get the flu shot each year.
@tuncalikutukcuoglu88004 жыл бұрын
Do Coase Theorem have some implicit and unrealistic assumptions, like: 1) Parties are fully informed about the future consequences of their actions and externalities 2) You can buy, repair or substitute everything (including the consequences of externalities) with money 3) Historical evolution of events that made some externalities look inevitable today; maybe there are some long-term social & ecological solutions that can make negative externalities completely unnecessary in future
@shubhamchaudhry4136 жыл бұрын
Thanks for your content really helpful and time saving. 👍🏻
@BonabooUNT2 жыл бұрын
The image from 0:39 to 2:17 isn't a bee. It's a fly.
@austincarrara8172 Жыл бұрын
This really helped ,y understanding of the topic! Watched 11/2/22 - Austin Carrara
@peternkala63816 жыл бұрын
What an interesting explanation and analogy
@muskduh2 жыл бұрын
Thanks for the explanation.
@pascalalf73943 жыл бұрын
Excellent, many thanks.
@nathantaylormckenzie8 жыл бұрын
Thanks so much, very helpful
@young-ceo5 жыл бұрын
Amazing video
@florianwicher9 жыл бұрын
A great video :) Thank you!
@uluvmycrazymind077 жыл бұрын
I love you guys! lol
@vladimirmisin18767 жыл бұрын
we need diagrams ..
@agustindangelo14123 жыл бұрын
any ideas? then suggest! :)
@essedikarrad18468 жыл бұрын
Thank you :)
@megasalexandros41503 жыл бұрын
how this theorem is related to the Kyoto protocol?
@JackDaniels-ee1fo8 жыл бұрын
There is a mistake with Coase Theorem. If the affected party does not have the property rights, and does not have the wealth to bargain and reach a mutual beneficial solution, then it is basically screwed.
@Riksmarskalk5 жыл бұрын
well they could sue for damage cause by the pollution
@user-in6qc4gx8g5 ай бұрын
6:48 / 8:15
@user-in6qc4gx8g5 ай бұрын
6:20 / 8:15
@ahaze35665 жыл бұрын
oh boy, I'm watching this to prepare for my exam tomorrow and I can't stop thinking about the anti-vax movement and how they will be so mad if they see it
@JS-rt8gm3 жыл бұрын
Especially with COVID right now
@tommao64716 ай бұрын
I also have an exam about this tomorrow XD
@pwnpicturez5 жыл бұрын
"moreover"
@alittlelightning10985 жыл бұрын
Any of my aca deca peeps here?
@davedelareza7 жыл бұрын
The factory shouldn't pollute and it shouldn't expect to be rewarded for not polluting ... I would have imagined common decency would have settled that!
@sullyflynn87467 жыл бұрын
Can you tell the person with the flu the same thing - that it's common sense not to pollute others with their coughing?
@ElBank20126 жыл бұрын
Well there are some categorical and other differences between the two examples. 1. If you catch the flu and contaminate the space shared with others, it is because you have NOT taken a specific action to prevent that. If the factory pollutes, it is because it is actually carrying out an action that with certainty leads to that. It is therefore actively contributing to produce an externality. It might be worth adding that most people think (common sense) that other people should avoid public spaces when they have the flu. 2. The person catching the flu does so involuntarily and without self-gain. The polluting factory (and the consumers consuming the produce) benefits directly from taking the action which lead to externalities. If someone would profit financially from just having the flu, I think most people (common sense) would think that that person has a responsibility to make sure that others weren't affected (this is the proper analogy). Of course, one can claim that the individual avoids the cost that the vaccination would incur and by doing so would benefit indirectly. However, then you will end up in discussions that goes back to the above.
@MidNightStudiosFilms6 жыл бұрын
On what were you typing that comment : ) You are a direct beneficiary of pollution if you own a phone/computer. Less Pollution=more expensive stuff.
@noneofyourbusiness62695 жыл бұрын
jesus what a brainlet can you keep up?
@cassnijders95326 жыл бұрын
:)
@jjangelo49004 жыл бұрын
i like this guy but he says "moreover" may too much
@mattsupertramp65065 жыл бұрын
He forgot to mention that autism is an external cost to getting a flu shot (lolol)
@Mujangga6 жыл бұрын
Acid Rain...? Increasing global sea levels...? What decade is this? Watch out for Y2K ;)
@yveshelsen54888 жыл бұрын
Sorry Cheung isn't right, you cannot drive with bees from garden to garden. They die, excuse me on the long term.
@sudpaul8 жыл бұрын
nonsense
@DeanFirth7 жыл бұрын
Don't know much about beekeeping or farming do you.
@TravisTerrell6 жыл бұрын
Yves Helsen This is trolling, right?
@LillyBatty5 жыл бұрын
@@TravisTerrell No, unfortunately. It is a lot of stress for the bees to be transportet like that and a lot of them die during the transport. Also the way in which they are transportet (several crowded hives in one transporter) fosters diseases and pests to spread, so... Cheung is making me cringe, too. This is basic ecological knowledge.
@haroldvallejob.30198 жыл бұрын
Huh... maybe it's so obvious to me that destroying Herd Immunity is a Negative Externality ought to be Fined, because I'm not american... ¿How about being loud in the middle of the night? A lack of sleep could reduce productivity. The CEO next door arrives an hour late, loosing a million dollar deal. Should the money lost be payed back by the loud person? Even if this person was having a schizophrenic meltdown?