ELECTIONS: Winner's announced

The votes have been counted and the winners are:

Kevin H. as President
Liya P. as Vice President
Mike O. as Treasurer
Meg P. as Secretary


Congratulations!
Now to plan for the upcoming year.

Tax Freedom Day

Today we celebrate Tax Freedom Day. This is the last day of the year we work to pay off all the taxes that are taken from us by the government. Thanks to The Tax Foundation for the info...
and to celebrate our freedom, they even made a song.


I had thought about it and thought today wouldn't be complete without a little tune from the Beatles:

FEE @ Mason

The FEE event at Mason turned out to be a great experience as many of us learned about various ideas including economic growth, international policies such as foreign assistance and security guarantees, anarchy, and a special lecture by Bryan Caplan about why people should have more children. One of my personal favorite speeches was by Geoffrey Lea who talked about the fundamentals of anarchism while questioning our individual beliefs. It was interesting how Geoffrey incorporated everyone into his speech – he questioned and listened to our ideas to build a path to explain anarchism and how it relates to our beliefs of liberty and freedom. I, personally, was inspired by this speech to learn more concepts of anarchy and privatization and to question my own beliefs of government in our modern society. Another great aspect of the FEE seminar was meeting different people from both Mason and other colleges as we were able to engage and converse about the various speeches, speakers, and ideas. It was great just hanging out with many of the Econ and non-Econ students at this social & academic event and learning from each others ideas. All in all, the FEE event included many different areas of economics, politics, and philosophy, and I believe many attendees were able to relate and understand the different concepts and ideas presented.

FEE@MASON: Caplan on Children

Many of those who had registered for attendance had missed out on some interesting lectures. I was one of those who missed out on Friday's lecture by Brian Caplan on "Selfish Reasons to Have More Kids". Fortunately, Professor Caplan has posted them under Fun Lectures on his website.
ENJOY!!!

ELECTIONS!

It is election time again! So, if you don't want to be an irrational voter with a crazy bias, please go through our candidates bios and plans for the Society in the upcoming year.

To run for candidacy you must have attended 3+ events or meetings in the past year. To vote, please show up on Wednesday April 30th in Enterprise 318 at 6pm. (If you cannot attend, but you are an active member and want to cast a vote, you can e-mail us and we can arrange it).

This is also a time for fresh ideas and suggestions/commentaries. Remember you do not need to be an officer to get involved!

Running for the Executive Board:
Kevin Burke
Kevin Hilferty
Michael Jenkins
Liya Palagashvili
Meg Patrick
Daniel Rivera

Click on READ MORE to go over the jump and view the bios of some of those running for office.

Kevin Hilferty:
My name is Kevin Hilferty, and I would like to run for President of the George Mason Economics Society for the 2008-2009 term. I believe I am a strong candidate for this position because of my love for Economics and leadership I acquired in helping plan the last events of this semester with President Astrid Arca. Since I was a junior in H.S. taking Intro Economics to AP Economics my senior year, and now pursuing a BA here at Mason my love for this subject has only grown. I feel extremely lucky to be able to study in a program that features two Nobel prizes and many of the world's top free-market thinkers. My goal if I become President is to continue to make the students in the Economics program aware of the many opportunities available to them at this great university. With so many great professors to learn from, ground-breaking research to be involved in, and a wide community of like-minded students, I believe that every student at George Mason should know what Mason really has to offer. Through increased programs, events, and marketing we can better disperse this knowledge to the Mason student. I have already begun preliminary planning of many events including the fall welcome social, debates, book events, and a new event specifically for freshman students that would introduce them to Masonomics. I have been studying the guidelines for budgets, spending, and requirements of Student Organizations and I am prepared for the bureaucratic challenges that we will face. I have recently gone over the past records of the GMU Economics Society and have had mentoring from past President Jaime Artieda and current President Astrid Arca Leigh. With my experience and motivation I hope to hit the ground running and I promise to do my best for the Econ Society.

Michael Jenkins:
I have held a fair amount of leadership positions over time, including

1. PR chairman of TKE
2. MQB board of TKE (this is a tribunal, I hear cases and recommend punishments/actions)
3. Member of Philanthropy committee TKE

In addition, I also have held management positions
Manager at Noodles and Company on Main Street
I have a very sincere interest in economics and spreading the views of economists and righting misconceptions about economics is something I believe to be very important. The economics society can not only serve to create connections and hold economic events, it can also spread basic principles of economics to the student body at large. Educating the student body on basic economics in fields like welfare, minimum wage, labor unions, regulation/price control, and the U.S. economy in general will help them to make smart decisions in the future. If given office, I fully intend to create a larger, more involved Economics society that can benefit both its members and the entire student body.

Liya Palagashvili:
My name is Liya, and I would like to run for Vice-President of the George Mason University Economics Society for the 2008-2009 school year. I believe I would be a dynamic candidate for this position because of my great interest for Economics, my experience both as a leader and a member of the Economics Society, and my commitment to the society. My interest in Economics first developed when I took a Political Economics and AP Economics class in high school where I learned the fundamentals of Economics and became passionate about it. Because of my interest for Economics, I decided to attend GMU, and I am currently pursing a Bachelor of the Science degree in Economics with a minor in Statistics.
As a member of the Economics Society, I have worked with President Astrid Arca, past President Jaime Artieda, running-President Kevin Hilferty and Student Liaison Ian Dunois. I have helped plan recent events with the Econ Society such as the FEE seminar at Mason and Daniel J. D'Amico's lecture on the Political Economy of Prisons which is coming up this Wednesday at 6 p.m. in Enterprise 80. Also, I have already worked on creating plans for the fall semester events with Kevin Hilferty. Furthermore, I have shown great commitment to the Econ Society by showing up to many of the events and meetings, and I will further commit myself to the Econ society as my education at Mason continues. My vision for the Econ Society is to promote the study of Economics and Liberty to the George Mason community. Whether students are Econ majors, minors, or just have an interest in Economics, I would like them all to know the great opportunities available to them at GMU. There are many Economics major who have never even heard of the Economics Society, and one of my goals is to make the Economics Society known to not only Econ majors, but also the other majors as well.

Russian Video Conference- An Attack on Consumerism

This morning at 9 a.m. I found myself in a video conference in Research I on the Fairfax campus of GMU with a room full of sociologists studying globalization and a room full of students from Moscow who said they studied global economy. The topic for the discussion was consumerism. Peter Stearns, a provost at Mason, had started the session by giving a brief introduction to what he believes is consumerism and to how he believes it should be viewed and addressed.
The event turned to be a lashing out against what they have taken to be Consumerism. For More Click the Read More above to make the jump.

Peter Stearns had roughly described consumerism as a deep interest of groups in acquiring goods they do not need. The purchase of goods that are not needed for survival.
Historically, Stearns stated, consumerism can be explained, but viewing that many societies were extremely hostile towards it the subject must be studied to comprehend why societies would want such a world. He had correctly turned to the 17th and 18th centuries with the Industrial Revolution and the beginning of the first globalization(trade with the colonies) as the source of the increase wealth which he saw as the reason why individuals began to buy the goods not essential to survive. To Stearns, consumerism grew because individuals wished to have things to identify themselves much like a wealthy person today purchasing a large mansion or designer clothes. He does not view this purchasing of material as a blessing but rather as an absurdity. Stearns had clearly defined his distaste towards the large debts most American citizens acquire in order to purchase these consumer goods. My response is simply, isn't it a good thing? We are receiving goods without even having to pay for them immediately. We are getting the upperhand within this deal. See CafeHayek for their so many blogs on this topic such as this recent one titled, "I [Heart] America's Trade Deficit"

I want to define here that consumer goods is never clearly defined. By defining consumer goods, as those goods which are not needed to survive, who is to say what is needed since what is needed for me is not needed for others. Bread has been the main food source for most of man's history. It was not until recently that man was able to have more choice in his food supply. In Mises' The Free Market and Its Enemies, Mises points out that Queen Anne of England had seventeen children; none made it to adulthood, yet with the Industrial Revolution, with the age of consumerism living standards improved allowing for the mortality rate to improve. Mises says, "from the point of view of the parents the improved life expectancy of their children may not have seemed merely materialistic(consumeristic)." In fact, Mises points towards consumerism as a gift. Before the Industrial Revolution, common man had bought his clothing through second hand stores. Clothing was handmade and a skillful task and therefore was only a good for the wealthy. The global trade with the colonies brought in cotton, a common man's good, which with the growth of industry began to be produced into clothing by mass production. Common man had improved his life by simply specializing and trading. Coffee, tea, sugar to our dear Provost are considered consumer goods, but to the common man in the 18th century this was a good that enabled him to feel as rich as a King. Today, common man can purchase an ice cream cone any day of the week. This is something that not even Kings could have enjoyed any day in the past.
Oh, Dear Provost Stearns... to claim that consumerism is what brings fault to many attacks upon the Jewish people. Throughout most of history, Christians and Muslims had believed charging interest to be a sinful act. They did not understand the necessity of the interest rate (a forward looking process), and as the Jewish faith did not have any law against such a practice, they quickly became the bankers and merchants. This perhaps may be one of the reasons why the Jewish people are viewed as always greedy. They invested and merely wanted their return, but to ask for repayment is sinful to other religions.
Provost Stearn, I was insulted to see your fear in globalization. This fear that consumerism, materialism, or whatever name it is we wish to impose on it is a greed that is useless and is devouring mankind. This materialism has provided for new forms of transportation, better living environments with air conditioning, and an increase of wealth that helps raise members of the society out of poverty. We do not want to spread this?
We have not even addressed the simple concept of comparative advantage.

To the dear Russian professors and students, do not fall for the faux pas. Trade is essential and a brilliant form of interconnecting mankind with one another. Why would anyone not want to have the goods that make you happy? We are not only producers but consumers... we live each day in purpose of bettering ourselves off for tomorrow. History is important so I am not trying to say that Provost Stearn is on the wrong track but to quote Mises' in Human Action. "The subject matter of all historical sciences is the past. They cannot teach us anything which would be valid for all human actions, that is, for the future too. The study of history makes a man wise and judicious. But it does not by itself provide any knowledge and skill which could be utilized for handling concrete tasks."

The Perverse Incentives of Student Program Funding

The past few weeks I have been trying to work on planning Econ Society events for the Fall semester. While this can be fun work coming up with new ideas, there are certainly some less exciting things to deal with with. The least pleasant task involved is going through the student funding board. Sure it is great that they pay for our events and all, but the filling and submitting forms can be a pain. Since I am a candidate for becoming the next President of the Econ Society, Astrid has been kindly showing me through this process of budgeting and working with the Student Funds Board. While reading the rules for the funding I was taken aback by a few things:
CLICK READ MORE FOR THE JUMP

1. There is not much in the way of getting $2500 per semester for your organization. You just fill out forms and submit them. I know some tax payer money goes towards this, but we also each pay an Activities fee in our tuition. So next time you see some long-haired hippies having Stop Sweatshop events you can smile knowing your money went to that
2. $173,786. That is the amount of money given in the 2003-2004 academic year alone to student organizations by the SFB at Mason. I can only imagine that they are spending much more now, with more students this year than ever.
3. Up to $1000 per semester can be given to an organization for fund raising events. The organization is allowed to keep all money from the fund rasier, the only rule is that it must not donate the money to any individual or organization. It doesn't say that the organization can't spend it on whatever they want though.

Of course the usual Public Choice theory on perverse incentives of bureacracy hold true here: bureacracies will maximize their budgets. The use-it-or-lose-it does not fully apply in this scenario though. Sure your club would be stupid to not use all the $2500, but if it uses less it does not lose any future funding. Another positive is that each organization can only get $2500 a semester as a rule, so I would hope there would be no rent-seeking or some organizations getting concentrated benefits more than the rest. Still for students and taxpayers, chances are that they are still getting shafted by this system. Every club that is rational is going to spend the entire $2500 per semester since there is no benefit to saving money.

While ruminating on all of this I stumbled across one of GMU's coolest PHd student professors, Dan D'Amico's, post on Mises.org from 2004 entitled, Deliver Us From "Student Government", in which he details the same if not worse situation at the University of Texas. Dan does an excellent job in the piece pointing out the problems and hypocrisy of student governments. One part that particulary caught my eye though was on funding at University of Texas:

"In my last semester, our SGA designated an amount of $10,000 to Etc, the student organization dedicated to spreading social awareness of gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender, etc lifestyles. Etc. applied for the money in order to host a fund raiser aimed at raising $3,000...The $10,000 is not a loan that will be returned but rather a gift to the student organization with certain stipulations. Etc. is not free to spend that $10,000 directly on its own goals and entertainment but according to SGA regulations, they are allowed to use it to fundraise an amount as low as ten percent of their initial request. Once they raise this money it is theirs to do with as they wish. This process magically turns $10,000 into $3,000 or less."

This is an amazing point that Dan brings up. Mason has a comparable system, but with more relaxed rules, but at least less money is given out. Unfortunately not even a 10% return is required for the fund raiser. So even worse, those kids whose organization you may disagree with politically, religiously, or morally, they can use the money you paid the school to have fund raisers after which they can keep the money for their own uses.

Now, you may ask what is the point of all this complaining, or what is the point because everyone already knows this happens. Don't worry, I have a reason for all of this and it is not all pessimism. Well infact, I do have a solution in mind that could be implemented to solve these incentives issues: direct rewards to organizations. The SFB should give out bonuses or rewards to be spent however they see fit to officers of clubs that do not spend all available funds for a semester. The reward amounts could be proportionate to the amount saved or not, as long as they were less than the money saved. The officers of clubs would have to think twice before requesting funds for large end of year party events, and certainly would not hold what they thought were useless events. Maybe this isn't the best solution, and maybe I have a conflict of interest in that I too want to be President of the next Econ Society, but I think it works. What do you all think?

An Intellectual Stimulus Package - A FEE event @ Mason

Foundation for Economic Education, now participating in university outreach, is hosting a full day of lectures at George Mason University on April 19th.











We have all heard the cries "IT IS NOT FAIR"
Well it is not, and FEE is here to help address the issues that are largely debated but hardly understood.

The issues will be from Foreign Aid; International Labor Standards; even to Institutions, Constitutions, and Economic Growth...

Speakers include Doug Bandow, Geoffrey Lea, and Joshua Hall.
Program for the event can be found here, and don't forget to register here, as it is to guarantee a copy of The Law (already have it? Good! Now get another to pass to someone else you may believe may benefit) and a lunch on Saturday afternoon.

The GMU Economic Society will kick off the FEE event the night before with a social gathering and a chance to hear from our very own Professor Bryan Caplan of The Myth of the Rational Voter fame.

Don't forget to sign up for the wonderful Summer Seminars at FEE in Irvington-on-Hudson, NY just a half hour outside of NYC!!! The seminars are first come first serve if you meet the criteria for the program basis, so act now and apply. Apply to more than one to increase your chances or to be the rare individual who gets to attend more than one...(note: Although you may get accepted to two programs, you may be asked to pay for the hotel accommodations for one of the seminar programs.)
Be on the look out for more information...