The question was asked on this case study what would be some of the things that would be included in an estimate of the opportunity cost of preserving part of northern Alberta Canada by prohibiting heavy crude oil extraction? The pros and cons of not utilizing the resource would be considered. How much revenue could be generated locally if extraction was allowed? An important question would be the effects on the environment if extraction was allowed. Another potential question is preservation the best use of the area with a natural resource? Those are a few choice factors in the opportunity cost of a preserve in northern Alberta Canada. It was also asked do you think that the increased extraction represents the best use of the land. I personally say that it is in the interest of preserving the planet for future generations. If we deplete and destroy everything in the name of economic growth there will be nothing left for the future. Another aspect is look at the economic and environmental damage done by an unforeseen disaster of the BP oil spill in the Louisiana gulf. I think what could be learned from that incident is just because you can doesn’t mean it is a good ideal. What is the worst possible potential problem of endeavor of that magnitude?
My opinion on if money can buy happiness, is that it most certainly can. Plain and to the point if you have more money you can obtain more in the pursuit of happiness. The notion that it can’t is a poor man pacifier to comfort him on his financial situation. I would imagine that the stress level would be significantly lowered or not even applicable do to the financial success achievement. I consider the question to be a quibble because who in there right mind would not be considerably happier if there financial status was ameliorated.
After reading the suggested reading material my ideology has only been solidified in the fact that money can buy happiness. The article “Who Says Money Cannot Buy Happiness?” was most profound and incite full. In the article it was stated that the general census on the subject matter is that money can’t buy you happiness. Economist recently provided an empirical on the issue. The finding of the observation that was fore taken was largely in favor of the popular conception that money dose not equal happiness. According to the findings of the real income per capita has more than doubled since 1950 in United States. Even though house hold income have increased over the decades the poll noted no significant change in happiness do to the noted increase. My logical theory on this assessment is inflation is an ominous Omni-present core factor to the financial equation and economic decisions.
The cost of living in working blue collard or white collard society constantly fluctuates and is on the rise. Inflation is the great motivator and is a key element to the pursuit of higher wages and financial stability and wealth. A prime example is that if you get a raise or procure a higher paying career resulting in an income increase that your cost of living all so in most cases will increase. With the income increase as a consumer you will increase your expenses. At this stage what was once indulgence do to new personal revenue has become necessity. With a new echelon of standard of living, the new revenue will not conceivably be enough for obtaining longevity in happiness because of variance in inflations. This is my theorem on the reason the results of the survey where in essence stagnant.
In the article “Who Says Money Cannot Buy Happiness” it is stated that we seek more because we believe it will make us happy. I concur with this notion especially as an American citizen and contributing consumer. America in essence portrays excess to success. Nice tongue twister! Try saying that Three times fast, no really! The more a person has such as vehicles, houses, land, money; all are considered measurement of success. The caliber of the opposite sex you...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document