How To Make Wwe Ring Ropes

fairy tales: Hansel and Gretel Guns can and

Shortly before the school holidays, one of my children has brought the school a well-known tale of the Brothers Grimm, "Hansel and Gretel." While I have always been fond of tales and mythology, although knowing the outline of the work of evil brothers, I had never read their story. By browsing, I told myself, as Bruno Bettelheim once with his famous "psychoanalysis of fairy tales" (1976), this tale and many others can be an excellent introduction to economics. This idea, reader, I'll pound, with my usual generosity, as well as prospective teachers high school having to cope with the reform programs of SES .... (This last suggestion is a bit ironic, of course, because trying to attract teens to the economy with "The Three Little Pigs" could trigger the hilarity in the class)

In fact, seeking a bit, I realized that this idea had already occurred to others, as Ed Glaeser here. He explains in particular, based on his 1992 article in the J ournal of Political Economy , how the "paradox of Cinderella" can be explained. Briefly, the paradox lies in Cinderella that the stepmother of Cinderella neglects the beautiful in terms of investment and family is all about the two sisters of Cinderella, which seems counter-intuitive because in the race for success, (who married the king's son?) it should not put all your eggs in one basket and diversify its assets (so pampered Cinderella to the same degree as her daughters). He also mentioned other stories that the educational dimension of economic perspective is interesting, as the "Wizard of Oz" or "Jack and the Beanstalk." Good

back on topic, or rather our Hansel and Gretel ....

[I note in passing that this ticket worth twice its weight of anything, because for the same price, reader, you have the elements of a fairy tale to tell your children if you do not know the story of Hansel and Gretel premium and ideas for reflection for your old age.
Moreover, reader, if you're a parent looking for stories to tell your toddler the night, here is one that enables you to terrify and frighten them with a bunch of witches and ogres imaginary likely to make them obey the finger and the eye, and this cheap ...]

So Hansel and Gretel live in a cottage at the edge of the forest with their father, a brave man, and a stepmother absolutely detestable. Preview:

" The family had always been very poor, but when the famine throughout the country, they had absolutely nothing to eat ."

suggestions economic discussion: the concept of exogenous shock, endogenous to the economy (the famine can be likened to one or the other, an exogenous shock if for example it is the result of weather conditions have reduced the level subsistence farming, or an endogenous shock if for example the government has implemented taxes on food products); inequalities of wealth and income, choice of optimal location in the model developed by Alfred Weber (1909), brother of Max, in his book "Theory of industrial location."

On this last point, for example, just to make development a little more consistent, the father of Hansel and Gretel is a logger and chose to locate near the forest and not near the consumer market, the city. Weber's model perfectly explains this choice as if the weight of raw materials is more important than the weight of consumer goods that are manufactured with this raw material and transportation cost is based on distance and weight, then it is optimal to locate near the source of raw materials. Otherwise (weight of the consumer goods exceed the weight of the raw material, it would have been optimal to locate close to the final market in town. It can also discuss the limitations of the model, this particular assumption that my brave woodcutter is a monopoly.

Let the following story with another excerpt:

"I see only one solution," said his wife, the lead deep in the forest and leave them there.
"Lord" said the father, you ask me to abandon my children? "
"Would you rather we die of hunger every four?"

Discussion and Comments: The stepmother, while highly unpleasant, has followed the ideas of game theory course (even if it does not exist when the Grimm wrote the story) because it uses very well the idea strategy (weakly) dominant of game theory. In effect, abandoning the children with a fatal outcome implies a high probability only for them (especially if the wolf from Little Red Riding Hood is not satisfied with the outcome of his feast-based Great Mother, chaperone and butter and pot of milk, and it still drags in the forest). Conversely, do not abandon them involves a fatal outcome for the whole family. The rational choice and selfish is quickly ...

It is also possible to insist also on the scarcity of resources and the infinite nature of needs, the economy is the science of arbitrage between the two.

Thereupon, the father takes them to the forest, but fortunately lose Hans took care to sow small white pebbles, which again allows for children to find their way to the family cottage.

[A note, reader, it seems that the brothers Grimm were slightly plagiarized Perrault (Tom Thumb), which itself was plagiarized from Strabo, who himself had to plagiarize Homer. Indeed, in the Odyssey, the Greek sow wooden horses to find their way to Troy? No?].

Well, I spend a little faster. The family has since been repaid a loan made to King, she waited more resource (can be developed on sovereign risk and debt, citing passing the current case of the Greek economy and the current difficulties and future of the Greek government to borrow from individuals). Therefore, everything goes well for a while until that resource is exhausted providential. The father (twice) again takes the children into the forest to lose her children, but Hansel takes care of sowing bread crumbs, which is of absolutely no help, a chubby prankster flies all of its benchmarks.

We could also introduce the theory of repeated games, as if every time the family is in need children are carried out in the woods, they should anticipate, Hansel and should have a reserve of several tons of small white pebbles.

Children fall on the gingerbread house in the forest, inhabited by a witch to catch them ("we do not catch a fly with vinegar") in order to fatten Hans devour. Gretel is her maid to the witch waiting for the day of the fatal feast.

This is a wonderful illustration of the concept of investment as a detour as the production presented the Austrian economist Eugen Böhm-Bawerk and the opportunity cost of capital formation .. . The witch has diverted some of its resources to build this house, which allows it to lure children away and yet another portion thereof to increase his capture.

Well, I pay the rest of the story, for your patience and mine must be exhausted. Hans
deceives the witch on her overweight (she's apparently a bit low to), then the children manage to throw in the oven and came across a treasure that made the fortune of the family, because, last but not least, they manage to find the way to the family home. All this ends up in an outpouring of joy at a reunion, especially since the meantime, the stepmother is passed from life to death, and there remains only the brave woodcutter who loves his children.

As an educational theory is valid only if it is tested, I tried to mark the reading of the story to make this introduction to economics for my son, seven years.

From our dialogue (I've dropped quite quickly on game theory and the concept of dominant strategy):

[At the time of passage over the detour of production]

- me: " you know, the witch eats Hans for it to grow and be more appetizing ... "

- him (obviously doubtful):" But why not the witch she eats all the sweets and cakes which she gives and she eats more Hans, even if it is lean? "

- me (even more doubtful):" Uh, maybe she likes not the candy first and then she may not be hungry today, so she prefers to wait until Hans is well chubby for when she is hungry .. . "

- him (frowning):" it is stupid that witch, she has to sell candy on e-bay, like that with the sub, it could buy meat and still Dining Hans if she's still hungry! "

- Me (annoyed):" Uh, I'll put the playstation, eh, it will be better ... "

I think he was not in a good mood, try next week with something more obvious, as the" three little pigs "....

Waveguide Cover Broke What I Do

paradox of crime prevention

A recent story in the broadcast "butterfly effect" of 6 February on Canal Plus has given me the clear idea of the ticket today. This documentary focused on the growing involvement of imitation firearms plastic in the robberies. A tragic broke the story, a robber was shot dead by police who had then reported the outcome of events that it did not point a plastic gun at her.

As stated in a police report in question, the penal code in fact does not distinguish between a toy gun and a real weapon in the assessment of a situation of legitimate defense. Therefore if you focus a policeman with a toy gun and he shot us felt threatened, then nothing can be opposed to its instrument. Besides, Article 338 of the Penal Code, according to what is said in the story (I am not a lawyer, so I hope this is true), does not distinguish between a sentence under pointing a toy gun or a real weapon: it is potentially twenty years' imprisonment together with d a fine of 150,000 euros. From there, a deputy PS, Bruno Le Roux, based on examples from Canada, Switzerland and Belgium, is pushing for the adoption of a law requiring manufacturers of replica firearms to distinguish them from real weapons by adding a specific color, pattern, etc.. This would make it impossible to potential confusion between the two types of weapons to any person whatsoever.

Everything seems based on sound common sense, except that at the end of the story, I could hardly understand the interest due to such a degree that would be the point of view of welfare being of society. Testimony indeed troubled me: a robber, clearly professional, explained that he forced himself to use fake weapons as well as he would be unable to pull the person threatened in case of reaction on his part aggression. Even when you're a pro at turning, with fear and adrenaline rush to own the situation of aggression, it is easy "he said to press the trigger inconsiderately. This allowed him to avoid potentially life sentence in fatal cases for the injured person. He therefore saw these fake weapons as a means to help himself to give in to his own panic to avoid the tragic consequences of a robbery carried out with real firearms and that goes wrong. His reasoning seemed could not be more rational.

Why? Unless we assume that the availability of imitation weapons relatively cheaper and easier to get than the actual weapons shoot the robbers or other small offenders in the act, which may be true, I could not help thinking that the rules intended to prevent the use of imitation weapons in true crime could cause more harm than positive effects.

Consider the impact of regulation reproductions of imitation weapons, which totally prevents using them to seriously threaten anybody. With regard to the professional robbers, it will not change much in their activity, except that the rising cost of a weapon, it might even push them to increase the number of robberies. This reminded me an example that illustrates the excellent textbook introduction to microeconomics Andrew Schotter I liked to show my students, and he calls the paradox of Delinquency Prevention . The offender is described, to borrow the idea advanced by Gary Becker, a homo economicus who must decide whether to arbitrate the use of his time between legal activities and illegal activities. Obviously, these activities have direct and indirect costs, opportunity for example. Therefore, increased police resources and the probability of being caught and jailed will generate as usual in the standard model of consumer two types of effects, a substitution effect and an income effect (see figure below).

Suppose that an individual , who has the choice between criminal activities and legal activities and shall allocate its endowment given once and for all time (8 hours per day for example) between these two activities. Each activity gives it a different remuneration, wm wage illegal activities (rogue) and wh honest wage activities. Call p the expected value risk of being caught and punished for illegal activities, p is constant, but the more the individual allocates his time in corrupt activities and the greater the chances of being caught in total (p is a unit cost). p can also be seen as a cost related to the exercise of criminal activity, such as the cost of weapons that I get, false papers, various information, etc.. Therefore, for each unit obtained wage dishonest, I must deduct the cost of production activity dishonest and the expected cost of being caught and punished.

If the government adopts a regulation that prevents any offender to use a toy gun, this means that p increases, assuming that the real weapons are more expensive than imitation weapons to be acquired through criminal activity, this that seems pretty obvious. In this case, if the cost to produce a deflection increases, then it can dissuade me from doing robberies and then increase the honest part of my work: it is the substitution effect (ES on the graph, it increasing the number of hours that I affect the business honest). But as the cost of dishonest activity increases, the compensation the two activities do not change, it also produces an effect on my income: All other things being equal, my real income decreases because if the production cost of dishonest activity has increased, the benefit I get out of honest and dishonest business does has not changed. I'm more guillemées between "poor" (I try to be as intuitive as possible, sorry to microeconomist "serious that I would read it). This effect of drop my real income may push me to compensate for increasing the number of hours that I affect the activity dishonest. It is the income effect. In this case, the substitution effect causes the individual to be more honest, but the income effect pushes the contrary to be less. As the income effect is more important here (it pushes the individual left on the x-axis) than the substitution effect (which pushes it right on the x-axis on the graph), the total effect is that the individual increases his dishonest activities.

The total net effect of the new regulation is here negative: more repression means more illegal activities. In this sense it is paradoxical, because in making it more costly activity criminal, criminals were encouraged to increase their final effort in this activity. In fact, this means that criminal activities are a Giffen good, that is to say a good whose demand increases when the price (or cost) of the property increases, which is the opposite of idea that one has on the demand for goods called "normal". This is apparently a vision entirely possible and serious criminal activities, as this article shows very recent ( here Michael Cain, 2009, Crime Is a Giffen Good? ", Journal of Financial Crime ). In fact, Battalio et al, 1991, "Experimental Confirmation Of The Existence Of A Giffen Good," American Economic Review, showed that the existence of Giffen effects (a demand for a good increases when its price increases) could be observed in the laboratory. Giffen These effects are also much more frequent than what economists usually assume, based generally on the assumption that a demand for goods decreases with the price. Battalio et al. , 1991 in particular stressed the fact that it is not so much to say that such and such property is inherently Giffen, but only for certain levels of price and income, many goods can be "local" property Giffen, as already noted Jack Hirschleifer.

I therefore could not help but think of this example certainly intriguing and somewhat artificial, few empirically based, but put his finger on the perverse effects of public policies incorrectly assessed, based on seems like common sense to do that member. I'm not saying he's wrong, of course, I have no serious study on hand-but one which he correctly assesses the full impact of this legislation it wants to pass? Nothing is less certain ... Rely solely on common sense and morality seems to me so extremely risky, especially when the lives of those assaulted is at stake

Novelty Underwear Superman

New Section Deep In Backing Orange Shrimp Tube Assembly Step by Steps

FLIES Deep In Backing

In this section you will find the popular flies personnel Deep In Backing (DIB) uses when it leaves

Fly of the Month January 2010 ORANGE SHRIMP (USK GRUB VARIATION)

This fly pattern for Atlantic salmon designed on a plastic tube to the surface patina that easily. If you preferred to present the fly in depth you can mounted on a tube of brass or aluminum.

This fly will be used on the River The Rocks (North Shore Quebec) in June

By Jocelin LeBlanc

Hook - tube fly hooks for
Tube - Small plastic tube
wire assembly - Black Tail
- Pen body making gold
Body - Back Half orange floss, front half black floss
Ribs - Tinsel Oval Gold Necklace
Central - Pen Body by Golden Feather
Collier-making body of golden

Jocelin & Julien