This Christmas, Americans Can Afford More Toys Than Ever

“Inflation has been a nasty grinch for the past few years—seemingly stealing away our hard-earned dollars while we sleep.
But the rising prices throughout much of the economy make it a little easier to appreciate the things that seem to be inflation-proof.

Like video games. When The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time was released in 1998, it cost $69.99 to order through the Sears catalog. Another Zelda game, Tears of the Kingdom, was released this year—25 years later—and it retailed for $70. That actually made it one of the most expensive games of the year, since most new Nintendo games these days sell for about $60.

Do the math. If Zelda games had kept pace with inflation, the new one should have cost about $130 today.

Sure, games today achieve some cost-savings because they’re digital downloads. That means production companies like Nintendo don’t have to pay for a physical game cartridge or CD-ROM, packaging, or shipping. But games today are also far, far more advanced than anything you could have bought for any amount of money a quarter-century ago.

It’s not just video games that have defied inflation’s steady creep. Toys in general are less expensive today, even before adjusting for inflation, than they were a few decades ago. That’s despite the fact that wages have grown significantly over the same period of time. The average worker in the United States made about $13 an hour in December 1998, compared to about $29 dollar per hour now.

This is true over longer periods of time too. As I wrote earlier this year, the amount of work necessary to buy a single new Barbie has fallen quite a bit since the doll was introduced. According to what University of Central Arkansas economist Jeremy Horpedahl has termed the “Barbie Price Index,” the average American woman has to work about 30 minutes to afford a Barbie—down from about two hours in 1959, when the doll first appeared on store shelves.

In fact, toys are so much cheaper today that some columnists say it’s a problem. “A toy that cost $20 in 1993 would cost only $4.68 today,” writes Katie Notopoulos, a senior correspondent at Business Insider.”

https://reason.com/2023/12/22/this-christmas-americans-can-afford-more-toys-than-ever/

Biden Expands Pardons for Low-Level Federal Marijuana Offenders

“President Joe Biden expanded a categorical pardon..for low-level marijuana offenders convicted on federal lands and in the District of Columbia”

“Biden also commuted the sentences of 11 nonviolent drug offenders serving sentences that were much longer than they would have been if the prisoners had been sentenced today. They were convicted of cocaine and methamphetamine offenses.”

https://reason.com/2023/12/22/biden-expands-pardons-for-low-level-federal-marijuana-offenders/

Trump’s Promise to ‘Indemnify’ Cops ‘Against Any and All Liability’ Is Absurd for 2 Reasons

“Schwartz found that cops were not actually on the hook for damages or settlements in civil rights cases even when their employers decided that their conduct warranted discipline or dismissal. They were not on the hook even when prosecutors decided that their conduct warranted criminal charges. Yet Trump claims that cops “avoid any conflict” and are “afraid to do anything” because they worry that frivolous lawsuits will ruin them financially.

In reality, even meritorious lawsuits often do not get far enough that the defendants need the indemnification they would virtually always receive. Under 42 USC 1983, victims of police abuse theoretically can seek damages for violations of their constitutional rights. But thanks to qualified immunity, a restriction that the Supreme Court grafted onto that statute, such lawsuits cannot proceed unless they allege conduct that violated “clearly established” law. In practice, that means plaintiffs must locate precedents with closely similar facts, a requirement that can block lawsuits when police behave in ways that even Donald Trump might consider beyond the pale.”

https://reason.com/2023/12/22/trumps-promise-to-indemnify-cops-against-any-and-all-liability-is-absurd-for-2-reasons/

Let Foreign Airlines Serve Domestic Routes in the U.S.

“Argentina’s new, libertarian President Javier Milei announced a so-called “open skies” initiative that will scrap many of the regulations prohibiting foreign airlines from operating flights between Argentinian cities. Combined with the abolition of government price controls on airfares, the new rules will allow foreign airlines to directly compete with Aerolineas Argentinas, the national airline that has managed to lose an estimated $8 billion since 2008 despite having a monopoly on domestic flights.
America, thankfully, does not have a government-owned monopoly responsible for domestic air travel. However, the federal government does prohibit foreign airlines from operating flights between American cities. That means Americans have only a few choices when it comes to flying domestically—and on some less commonly traveled routes, maybe no choice at all.

Those restrictions on “cabotage” by foreign-owned and -operated airlines are naked protectionism for the shrinking number of American-based airlines. As always, consumers pay the price—and could reap the benefits of greater competition.

A 2020 paper by researchers at the Brookings Institution, Bayes Data Intelligence, and Washington State University, for example, found that American travelers would realize $1.6 billion in annual benefits from the entry of just one foreign airline into the U.S. market.

Some of those benefits would be rather straightforward: lower prices created by greater competition. But other benefits would likely materialize too. If given the chance to expand their operations into the United States, low-cost European airlines like Ryanair could bring their innovative business models to this side of the Atlantic.

Indeed, as the Cato Institute’s Scott Lincicome pointed out in a post for The Dispatch last year, the elimination of national monopolies and cabotage regulations in Europe during the 1990s has produced a flourishing market that includes legacy brands (like Air France and Lufthansa) along startups like Ryanair, WOW, and others.

The result: “These airlines have low prices, lots of fans, and (unsurprisingly) tons of capacity,” Lincicome wrote. In the United States, a similar arrangement could lead to “lower fares, more routes/capacity, more jobs—and no federal subsidies or brute force needed.””

https://reason.com/2023/12/26/argentina-will-deregulate-airlines-america-should-do-the-same/

The ruling-party candidate strongly opposed by China wins Taiwan’s presidential election

“Ruling-party candidate Lai Ching-te emerged victorious in Taiwan’s presidential election on Saturday and his opponents conceded, a result that will determine the trajectory of the self-ruled democracy’s relations with China over the next four years.
China had called the poll a choice between war and peace. Beijing strongly opposes Lai, the current vice president who abandoned his medical career to pursue politics from the grassroots to the presidency.

At stake is peace, social stability and prosperity on the island, 160 kilometers (100 miles) off the coast of China, which Beijing claims as its own and to be retaken by force if necessary.

While domestic issues such as the sluggish economy and expensive housing also featured prominently in the campaign, Lai’s Democratic Progressive Party’s appeal to self-determination, social justice and rejection of China’s threats ultimately won out. It is the first time a single party has led Taiwan for three consecutive four-year presidential terms since the first open presidential elections in 1996.”

https://www.yahoo.com/news/polls-open-taiwan-voters-choose-000222277.html

This week in Bidenomics: US airstrikes target inflation, too

“The Middle East war is widening, but that may be better than the alternative: new inflationary pressure from an obscure fundamentalist militia 8,000 miles from US shores.
The US and UK militaries finally struck back at Houthi forces in Yemen on Jan. 11 and 12, in response to at least 27 Houthi attacks on commercial ships navigating the Red Sea between northern Africa and Saudi Arabia. There were legitimate military reasons for the retaliatory strikes, given that the Houthis have targeted US and allied forces, including Israel. But there was a powerful economic incentive too: The attacks on commercial vessels were starting to drive up shipping costs and threatening to reignite inflation, just as the Biden administration feels it is finally taming the biggest barrier to a second term for President Biden.

The Red Sea is a crucial shipping lane because the Suez Canal, at its northern tip, connects waters that serve Western markets with the Indian Ocean and routes to Asia. Ships unable to transit the Red Sea need to take the much longer and costlier journey around the southern tip of Africa. About 15% of world trade transits the area.”

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/this-week-in-bidenomics-us-airstrikes-target-inflation-too-191234965.html

Escalation in the Red Sea

“”the [Biden] administration declassified intelligence indicating that Iranian paramilitary groups were coordinating the Houthi attacks, providing targeting information about commercial shipping passing through the waterway and the Suez Canal.””

https://reason.com/2024/01/02/escalation-in-the-red-sea/