In addition to Apple’s announcement of the new “Airpods Pro”, last week, Apple announced that they are making a $2.5 billion pledge to help ease the egregious cost of living in California, particularly in the Silicon Valley area.

The Plan 

As part of this announcement, Apple laid out a five-point course of action that includes $1 billion for affordable housing investment fund, $1 billion in mortgage assistance for first-time home buyers and in addition, opening up 40 acres of Apple-owned land, valued at around $300 million, for affordable housing. Apple stated that the remaining $200 million will be given to a San Francisco Affordable Housing fund and additionally, surrounding vulnerable cities. While the severity of the housing crisis, in both the Bay Area and California as a whole, is urgent and rapidly increasing, Apple’s plan will take two years to reach completion–depending on the availability of projects, that is. That being said, money made on the projects will be reinvested in future projects over the coming five years. 

Overall, Apple believes that their efforts will give the state of California an open credit line to build more houses and suppress the economic constraints that large tech companies have plagued regions like Bay Area, and many more, with. The financial package was created in partnership with California Governer Gavin Newsom, who pledged to inspire the “biggest wave of homebuilding in modern history.” 

Other Tech Companies Participate

Seeing as Apple is not alone in contributing to the housing crisis, other large tech companies have pledged and drafted similar initiatives and programs. This past June, Google pledged $1 billion to “redevelop company-owned land for affordable housing” and additionally, created an investment fund to attract developers to construct, at minimum, 5,000 affordable housing units in Silicon Valley. In January, Facebook partnered with an organization to raise $500 million aimed at fighting the housing crisis in California. Beyond the Bay Area, companies like Microsoft and Amazon have publicly stated that they would funnel funds towards affordable housing initiatives in Seattle (where they are headquarted).

The Housing Crisis

So what’s the issue at play here? Currently, in San Francisco, 7,000 people are homeless and in San Jose, the average home value is $1 million–double the price from 2012. With an influx of tech companies and high-paid workers flooding into both San Francisco and the surrounding Bay Area neighborhoods, a shortage of affordable rent and housing options have crowded out middle and low-income workers (See Graph Below for Average Home Sale Prices). As a result, five Bay Area counties have been named five out of the six most expensive places to live in the country. Those who’ve fallen victim to this phenomenon include: teachers, restaurant workers and a multitude of people working blue collar jobs. 

Apple CEO Tim Cook stated “Affordable housing means stability and dignity, opportunity and pride. When these things fall out of reach for too many, we know the course we are on is unsustainable, and Apple is committed to being part of the solution.” Apple, clearly, is aware that as a juggernaut in the tech industry, their power and success have sweeping social and economic effects on the markets and economies surrounding their businesses headquarters. While IPO’s of tech companies and an increase in tech employees have driven up home values and rent prices in regions like the Bay Area, some of the housing costs issues are fed by problems in which companies like Facebook and Apple are not directly responsible. For example, San Jose, a city of 1.035 million people, has issued over 1,300 housing permits for residential buildings in the first half of 2019, however only 134 are for affordable housing. This poses as a threat to the completion of tech companies efforts aimed at helping the issue. George Ratiu, a senior economist at Realtor.com, cautions that at this pace, the 20,000 units that Facebook envisioned might actually take years and years to complete. Because construction isn’t keeping up with demand and housing prices are steadily increasing, people are leaving. In a direct response to the Bay Area housing issues, many have relocated to cities like Austin, Texas or Charlotte, North Carolina. 

Too Little Too Late

While it’s only right that companies accountable have begun to try and reverse the effects they’ve had on the housing market, economists and scholars warn that they might’ve come flying to the rescue a little too late. Vice President of Market Economics at Auction.com Daren Blomquist warns that because of the time it takes to build more houses and inventory, these companies might be too late. In an interview with MarketWatch, Blomquist stated “Even if ground was broken tomorrow on the new affordable housing being promised, that housing wouldn’t likely be available for at least another year, if not more.” Senator Bernie Sanders even said that apples entrance into the real estate lending industry is an attempt to dilute the fact that they helped create the current housing crisis. 

While the amount of money that these large companies have donated is rather large and worthy of recognition, some believe that it’s just a dollar short. MarketPlace notes that the public housing issue needs an injection of around $50-70 billion dollars on a national level. To this end, experts accept the money with open arms, but they know that it won’t be the end all be all for the housing crisis. 

The Ideal Solution

So what’s the correct answer? While the insane amount of donations that tech companies have pledged will surely have an impact, the true solution extends way further than donations. Beyond investing in construction, critics have acknowledged just how integral it is that all groups–businesses, community members, government actors– work together in fighting this issue. Having just the private sector involved in determining the supply of housing could actually increase housing prices all together and furthermore, in the end, it really won’t benefit companies to become reliant on tech juggernauts to save the day with large donations in the face of a crisis. 

Perhaps more effective would be if policymakers worked together to address zoning and building regulations. More specifically, the same regulations and zoning practices that have delayed developer’s agency in building new homes. Seeing as tech companies have a rather large public platform to vocalize a political and social voice, perhaps tech companies could publicly exert pressure on state and local law agents to loosen the above regulations. If they threaten to leave the area or usurp previously mentioned donations should these regulations persist, lawmakers might actually reassess and address the current housing regulations. 

Going forward, tech companies should be proactive rather than reactive. For example, housing developers have to pay a fee that supports the construction of affordable housing in the city of Mountain View (located near Silicon Valley). To allow housing developers to buy land before prices shot up, LinkedIn made this money available two years in advance to the actual construction. If Apple, Facebook and Google look into the future to draft proactive measures, they might be able to circumnavigate the existence of future problems instead of addressing them after the fact. 

Sources

1. https://www.kjrh.com/news/national/apple-will-spend-2-5-billion-to-help-solve-californias-housing-crisis
2. https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-10-21/gavin-newsom-california-housing-crisis-solution
3. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/apple-facebook-google-and-amazon-are-putting-billions-of-dollars-toward-affordable-housing-but-that-money-may-be-too-little-too-late-2019-11-08

Venezuela’s debt has doubled in only one year!

Venezuela has been in the news over their economic collapse for the past couple of years. Some economists and historians have even deemed Venezeulas economic collapse as the biggest in decades outside of war. Most recently, Venezuela hit the news as their national debt doubled in one year and is not almost double the level of the country’s GDP. As Simon Constable says in his Forbes.com article “Venezeula Sinks Further into Oblivion” “At the end of the second quarter, total borrowing[in Venezuela] reached 198.4 percent of GDP”(Constable). When businesses and household debt become included in debt, the total debt comes out to be 221 percent of GDP.

Hyperinflation is at 9,072 percent!

You read that right! Another economic indicator that is plaguing the Venezuelan economy is its 9,072 percent inflation rate! Well at least its better than deflation right? Only if you can recover from 9,072 percent worth of inflation! Foreign investors have placed such high interests rates on Venezuela’s lackluster cryptocurrency- the Petro which also further raises in the inflation rate and debt since it is impossible for Venezuela to pay their debt back. Venezuela has also taken out massive loans of 63 billion dollars from China since 2007, which also looks like they will not pay back anytime soon. Also, since 2016, every quarter has produced double-digit declines in GDP. Furthermore, when inflation was at 7,000 percent, President Maduro implemented a policy to eliminate the zeros from paper Bolivar bills so that a ten thousand Bolivar bill would be now worth ten. This further raised inflation and caused more economic turmoil. It is also important to note that the 9,072 percent inflation rate is just right now and the total inflation rate is expected to eclipse 15 million percent by the end of the year.

Why is Venezuela in this economic collapse if they have the most oil-rich country in the world?

You read that correctly. Venezuela, in the biggest non-war related economic collapse in decades, has the most oil reserves of any other country in the world. So how are they in crisis with an extremely valuable resource in oil? Well, that is a great question and is a big factor of why the Venezuelan citizens are so critical of the people in power. In fact, the only reason why Venezuela is not recovering from the economic collapse is because not only is President Maduro taking most of the money and resources in for himself, but also the actual leading oil company in the country, PDVSA, is so terribly run.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Venezuela is not just in an economic collapse, but also a political one. Because the country has virtually no assets or wealth, besides their terribly run oil reserves which aren’t helping decrease inflation, civilians are starving and homeless, while the political leaders use the mere money and resources left to live lavishly. To fix this issue, first off President Maduro needs to be out of office, and a new economically driven candidate can be elected to at least stop hyperinflation from getting worse. The head of PDVSA needs to be fired so the resource-rich company can promote value within Venezuela.

In October, China’s consumer-price index rose 3.8% compared to last year, the National Bureau of Statistics said Saturday — higher than a median of 3.5% predicted by economists polled by The Wall Street Journal, and far outpacing September’s 3.0%.

The Consumer Price Index or CPI measures changes in the prices paid by consumers for a basket of goods and services. It is widely used as an economic indicator. And It is the most widely used measure of inflation and the effectiveness of the government’s economic policy.

According to data released by NBS, “food/tabacco/wine” has the greatest increase, 11.4%, among all other categories. And among all food categories, pork price has the most significant jump: it rises 101.3%, accounting for 2.43 percentage points in the increase of the CPI.

A doubling of pork prices sent Chinese consumer inflation to its highest level in nearly eight years, constraining Beijing’s ability to stimulate the economy as growth continues to slow.

Soaring pork prices lifted overall food-price inflation to a more-than-11 year high, as consumer demand drove up prices for pork alternatives including eggs and other meat products. And the reason behind the price spike was African swine fever, a highly contagious virus that is lethal to pigs but not to humans.

During this summer, I worked as a reporter at “The Paper,” one of China’s most influential digital news outlets. And one of the investigative stories I worked on was about the outbreak of the African swine fever in Chinese rural villages in Jiangsu Province. Dozens of villagers reported large-scale death of pigs due to the disease. The videos they shot showed countless dead pigs abandoned by both sides of the road or in the ditch. They told me that “nearly all the pigs in the village died overnight.”

As a result, they sold the only surviving pigs at a very low price to reduce loss. Some of them sold the dead pigs at an even lower price. This contributed to a declining producer-price index (PPI) — pork-related products could buy the raw pork at a better price. However, the disease caused a sudden decline of pork available to the public and the demand for pork suddenly grow exponentially. Therefore, the CPI increased in response.

Another interesting trend I have noticed during my investigation was that the Chinese government has been trying really hard to cover the fact that the African swine fever has taken over. My story received a prior restraint and did not get published successfully dut to government censorship. During the first months of the outbreak, there was fairly less coverage of the disease in the mainstream media. On one hand, the government officials have announced in public that the fever has been eliminated, and they did not want the public to distrust them. On the other hand, admitting the disease would create a public disturbance that could further push down the pork prices. 

However, if the PRC does not address the issue directly and keep avoiding the topic, the situation will continue to worsen and push the CPI to a dangerous level.

While the prices charged by retailers to consumers are in an inflationary spiral, prices China’s factories charge to their clients are in a deflationary spiral. China’s PPI, seen as a key indicator of corporate profitability, dropped 1.6% into the deflationary territory from a year earlier, marking the steepest decline since July 2016. And it’s the result of both demand and supply pressures on the Chinese economy.

On the demand side, the exports weakened because of a slowing global economy and the ongoing trade war with America. Exports from China declined by 0.9% year-on-year to $212.93 billion in October of 2019, following a plunge of 3.2% in September, according to Tradingeconomics.com.

On the supply side, there’s excess factory capacity, due to the building of factories that practically duplicate each other, as discussed in a previous piece here. These factories churn out similar products and engage in a price war.

The increased CPI and decreased PPI may foresee inflation for China, and the Chinese government has to address the issue involved in order to get things back on track for 2020.

Reference:

2019年10月份居民消费价格同比上涨3.8%. http://www.stats.gov.cn/tjsj/zxfb/201911/t20191109_1708139.html.

“China Consumer Price Index (CPI).” China Consumer Price Index (CPI) | 2019 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast, https://tradingeconomics.com/china/consumer-price-index-cpi.

MarketWatch. “China’s Consumer Inflation Hits Nearly 8-Year High.” MarketWatch, 11 Nov. 2019, https://www.marketwatch.com/story/chinas-consumer-inflation-hits-nearly-8-year-high-2019-11-10.

Mourdoukoutas, Panos. “China’s Price Trap.” Forbes, Forbes Magazine, 11 Nov. 2019, https://www.forbes.com/sites/panosmourdoukoutas/2019/11/10/chinas-price-trap/#ecf1c105454d.

Hailing from Baraboo, Wisconsin, Houston Rockets General Manager Daryl Morey was on  top of the world. By relying on statistical analysis and the true shooting percentage stat, he has built the Houston Rockets basketball team into an NBA powerhouse. They have made the playoffs every year since 2012, a feat only two other teams have accomplished in team history. Morey has made some of the biggest signings of all time by securing James Harden, Russell Westbrook, Chris Paul, Dwight Howard, and many more players to long term deals.

The Houston Rockets have maintained their strong international presence created by the 2000s, and opened the door for the first Chinese star in the NBA by drafting Yao Ming in 2002. Now, James Harden is the 3rd highest selling jersey in China, where the NBA is the most popular sports league. According to Vox, more people watch NBA games in China than in the U.S. The NBA has built its reputation as a global league primarily through China as a touchpoint, creating hundreds of millions in revenue through merchandise sales and countless fans through Chinese NBA exhibition games. The economic and cultural stakes of the NBA’s relationship with China are no light burden. 

And then with a single tweet having nothing to do with basketball, Daryl Morey threatened to collapse the NBA’s massive commercial market in China. The owner of the very team that first struck superfandom in Chinese basketball fans hearts, became a major enemy of the Chinese corporations that air NBA games. He tweeted, “Fight for freedom, stand with Hong Kong.” While Morey may have tweeted with good intentions and used his American right to speak freely, China saw his tweet as a rebellion effort and insult to their country. China’s biggest airer of NBA games, Tencent, put all Rockets broadcasts on hold. Chinese fans were outraged by Morey’s comments and seeming insensitivity to China’s stake in the Hong Kong protests. The NBA sent out two statements, one apologizing to China for Morey’s “wrong” actions, and one acknolwedging the situation to the U.S. public. This did not go over smoothly, as both sides could read the other, and recognized the NBA trying to pander to sentiments to maintain a sense of peace (and keep their flow of profit). Morey has since removed his tweet, and kept quiet about the whole situation. 

This speaks to the larger trickiness present in U.S.-China trade in the age of social media. With a few words Morey probably didn’t think twice about, he threatened the balance of a billion dollar industry in which billions of people across the globe participate. Daryl Morey has found support from those who are unhappy about Chinese censorship’s power over American industries, which is exemplary of the American government’s current sentiments towards trade with China. 

This situation is unfortunate because the global commerce, sponsorship, and ambassadorial pursuits of the NBA have built up so much momentum in the past few years, and Morey’s tweet may set that progress back. Though this doesn’t drastically affect the trade war, upsetting the titanic corporation of Tencent does upset the hundreds of millions of viewers who lose out on NBA games and American corporations who stand to make huge profit on sponsorship deals. 

Sources: 

In the past few years that has been a sudden boom in the plant-based meat industry. The trend has become so popular that many of your favorite fast-food chains have deals cut out with the big name brands such as Impossible Foods and Beyond Meats. With chains releasing new plant-based menu items recently, it has shown that the potential for this industry may have not hit its peak quite yet.  

According to reports by the Plant-Based Food Association, sales from plant-based foods in 2018 were higher than $3 billion. Despite all the excitement and craze for plant-based meats, many are still skeptical that this isn’t going to help drive revenue for fast food chains. With a reduced number of beef products hitting the shelf, the benefits for our ecosystem are positive but this will come at the cost of the farmers who have dedicated their lives to the industry. Plant-based products have the opportunity to completely change the fast-food market but will leave behind the cattle farmers in doing so.

In October, following the addition of the “Impossible Whopper” to their menu, Burger King’s parent company Restaurant Brands saw a 5% rise in sales for the quarter which is the highest growth the company has seen since 2015. Burger chains weren’t the only ones to capitalize on the hype. As for fast-food giant KFC, the company partnered up with Beyond Meat for a plant-based chicken nugget. The chain test trialed the product at an Atlanta location and it sold out in the same month it was released.

The repercussions of the meat industry are evident with a rise in deforestation due to cattle as well as the carbon emissions in the atmosphere. But many benefits show us that we should not cut out beef entirely.

Cows essentially convert cellulosic energy which is then turned into a tasty meal that can be consumed by humans.  According to Frank Mitloehner of UC Davis, half of all land in California is marginal land and without cattle, you could not use that land and that two-thirds of all agricultural land could not be used for food production for people. In addition to that the excretions from cows help fertilize the soil which helps to bring us the best quality of crops to consume.

Around the world consumption for meat is still on the incline but as for the United States and the United Kingdom, the “meat peak” may have been reached in 2010. The alternative meat industry is proving that this “fad” isn’t going away anytime soon. The cattle industry is going to need a major re-adjustment for their business model now that the fast-food chains are going to be the central distributor for their products. The stigma of a different kind of fake meat has now turned into a positive market ploy for the chains to stay relevant in a culture seeing a rise in vegans.

Additional Sources

https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/28/investing/restaurant-brands-earnings-burger-king-popeyes/index.html

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/18/meatless-alternatives-are-on-the-rise-so-is-global-meat-consumption.html

There is no doubt about it: February is a rough month to be single. With retailers everywhere fueling Valentine’s Day, one can’t help but feel at least a little left out. But who is Valentine’s Day really for? In theory, it is to celebrate your loved ones, especially your significant other. In practice, however, many feel that Valentine’s Day is more for consumerism and retailers more than anyone else. With companies and retailers making massive profits every February, Valentine’s Day has been dubbed a Hallmark Holiday, curated to make people feel like they need to spend money to prove their love. In fact, one 1994 study surveyed 105 men “found that though they primarily associated a feeling of love or friendship with Valentine’s Day, a sense of obligation was a close second.” (theatlantic.com). With the percent of people planning on participating in Valentine’s Day hitting an all time low in 2019 (only 51% of people), it is clear that individuals aren’t buying gifts because they want to, but because they feel like they have to. 

But just how much are people spending out of obligation? As it turns out, quite a lot. In 2019, “celebrants were spending a record amount of $161.96 per person. That beat the 2016 record of $146.84. It’s also 13 percent more than the $143.56 spent in 2018.” (National Retail Federation). On average, men spend as much twice as much as women for the big day, which can be explained by the antiquated social expectation for men to demonstrate their ability to provide for women financially (thebalance.com). And while you may feel victorious when you buy your spouse the purse she’s been eyeing for months, no one wins more than retailers during the season of love. In 2019, shoppers funnelled a record high of $20.7 billion dollars into the economy, according to the National Retail Federation. The industries profiting most from love (and obligation) are “jewelry at $3.9 billion, clothing/lingerie at $2.1 billion, flowers at $1.9 billion, candy at $1.8 billion, gift cards at $1.3 billion and greeting cards at $933 million” (FoxBusiness.com). Tiffany & Co. , for example, saw “better-than-expected results with overall worldwide net sales rising 15 percent” during the first quarter of last year, which Valentine’s Day falls under (The Financial). 

Consumer spending statistics tell us that spending for Valentine’s Day is on the rise, despite the fact that the number of people participating in the holiday seems to be falling. How can we explain this phenomenon? While I cannot pretend to have all of the answers, one possible explanation is increased consumer confidence due to an expanding economy. The U.S. economy has been steadily growing over the past few years and this leads people to feel secure in their financials. When people feel richer, they are more likely to splurge a little extra for special events like Valentine’s Day. So while five years ago, you may have bought your boyfriend the speaker system that costs $400, you are feeling financially strong this Valentine’s Day season and decide to buy him the $700 set instead. He’s a lucky guy…this year. 

Regardless of whether you are buying out of devotion or out of societal pressure to live up to your role as ‘good significant other,’ the fact stays the same: you are buying. And as long as consumers continue to keep the holiday alive with gifts and special outings, retailers and Valentine’s Day will live happily ever after, oh so blissfully married by fervent capitalism and heart-shaped boxes.

This year, the United States’ fertility rate hit 59 births per 1,000 women, the lowest number it has been in 32 years, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. 

Since the Great Recession, the number of births has decreased due to the financial investment of having a child and how the recession took away resources that were necessary to support families. However, although the economy has since recovered, the fertility rate has not increased dramatically since. Many Americans cite the financial cost of raising a child as their primary reason for delaying child births. 

Several factors have contributed to the decline in childbearing. The overall decrease in teenage pregnancies, the availability of birth control, a shift in delaying marriage in favor of furthering personal careers and the higher cost of childcare and education have played roles in this decline. Women also cite that having better access to child care and stronger parental leave policies could spur more childbirths over the next years. 

Seventy percent of women in the U.S. today work outside the home, according to an article by Vox. On the one hand, more women in the workforce means more income tax being spent and the enjoyment of more disposable income. As we studied, consumer spending plays a large factor in GDP. In addition, with the need for specialized labor, a more educated workforce can create more opportunities for higher, advancing sectors that can stimulate the economy. Some also cite that lower fertility rates can be beneficial to ration our limited resources. 

On the other hand, declining birth rates can also have long-term effects. For one, the elderly population will increase creating an eventually-declining labor force and not enough people to work (much like in Japan).

The United Nations predicts that by the year 2100, 30 percent of the population will be made up of people ages 60 and above. With longer life expectancies, this can create an age imbalance that leaves a limited number of able-bodied people to work. Economists have predicted that this will create a rising need for increased healthcare, thereby also increasing its costs. With a smaller workforce, those who pay income taxes to fund these medical programs will also shrink as well. 

To increase the amount of people in the workforce, lawmakers have proposed keeping older people working longer, a solution that may not be feasible or welcomed. Another solution is relying on automation, artificial intelligence and robots to boost production and replace workers but this also has its limits. The last solution is to boost immigration to bring in more people who desire to work and fill jobs. If the U.S. is heading towards a recession by next year, there will be a chance that fertility rates will start to decline as people prepare for an economic slowdown, which can have overall negative effects on our economy.

Sources:

https://www.marketplace.org/2019/01/22/americans-are-having-fewer-babies-and-it-might-have-do-economy/

https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2018/5/22/17376536/fertility-rate-united-states-births-women

https://www.businessinsider.com/dropping-fertility-rates-will-affect-the-economy-2016-11

https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/27/news/economy/arizona-birth-rates-economy/index.html