What if there was a law that said businesses had to provide consumers with a easy to understand price breakdown of a product that costs $1000 or more after tax?
It could be a four category structure, such as material costs, labor, transport and markup. This way consumers can better assess the value of a purchase and it could deter companies from over pricing products or use misleading language to give the illusion of value.
What does everyone think?

Serious question. I’m a union trade worker and it seems it’s getting harder and harder to find work. A quick google search reveals that more and more GC’s in this country are turning to non union man power. What’s our future look like? Are we pricing ourselves out of work?

The union seems to have stooped to a new level just hiring people who can breathe. It wasn’t this way before. Not that it’a a bad thing but there was a big push for minorities and women in the trades. Is this a last ditch effort to bring in numbers?

My local speciffcally had a major with corruption. It seems the big guys are sucking it all up before the end. Thoughts?

I've been thinking about the ethics of intellectual property, especially when it comes to patented seeds and genetically modified crops.

I understand that companies invest time, money and research into developing better crops, and they deserve to earn something from their work. But I think agriculture is a special case.

Food is something almost everyone depends on to survive. Should companies really have the same level of control over agricultural innovations as they do over ordinary commercial products?

Humans didn't create the biological ability of plants to grow and reproduce. Agriculture also builds on generations of farmers' knowledge, selective breeding and the preservation of natural genetic diversity. Yet companies can obtain intellectual-property rights over certain plant varieties and restrict how their seeds are used.

I'm not saying companies shouldn't profit from their research. But should the right to profit ever outweigh the public's right to access something essential to survival?

Here are a few alternatives I've been thinking about:

• Stricter rules for essential crops: Shorter exclusive periods or stronger licensing requirements for technologies critical to food security.
• Public or collective ownership: Especially for publicly funded research, allowing multiple parties to access and commercialise the technology under reasonable terms.
• Mandatory disclosure and eventual public access: Once exclusive rights expire, others should be able to use the disclosed invention without unnecessary barriers.
• Stronger farmers' rights: Protecting reasonable rights to save and replant seeds, while balancing the interests of breeders.

Of course, weaker intellectual-property protection could discourage private investment. That's a legitimate concern. But perhaps public funding, research grants and shared licensing could reward innovation without allowing a few companies to gain excessive control over essential resources.

I'm curious what others think:

1. Should food-related technologies have different intellectual-property rules from other inventions?
2. Could public or collective ownership work, or would it create even bigger problems?
3. Where should we draw the line between rewarding innovation and restricting access to something humanity depends on?

I'm not arguing that all patents are bad. I just think we should question whether the current balance between private profit and public interest is the right one.

Historically, workers have been able to negotiate better wages and working conditions by withholding their labor, forcing employers to absorb the costs of lost production.

As AI and robotics continue to advance, I'm curious how this might change the economics behind that relationship.

If employers become less dependent on human labor to maintain production, does that reduce the effectiveness of strikes and collective bargaining?

Is there existing economic research that examines how automation affects this relationship?

I’m in second year studying economics. I want to do a placement year and am about to start applying but I don’t really have much of an idea about what sort of job I want to do after I graduate. I am doing BA economics and I prefer the policy/ theory side of things as oppose to econometrics and the statistics part. What sort of firms would be good for me to apply for placements? I am also aware that I could maybe do a placement outside of economics and finance; are there any placements that would take me as an economics student that aren’t directly economics or finance roles?

I'm finishing an MSc in Economics at Università Cattolica in Milan, a good university but not a target one (not LSE/Bocconi/TSE tier), graduating in March 2027. I'd appreciate honest input from people who've been through PhD admissions or work in central banks.
My profile:
GPA: approx. 3.6/4.0. Solid, but not top of the class.
Research experience: about 4 months as a research assistant for a professor, building a bank-level panel dataset to calibrate a DSGE model.
Next step: I'll most likely start a post-graduation traineeship in the monetary policy department of a euro area central bank.
No GRE yet.
My dilemma:
I've always had the idea of doing a PhD, but I'll be honest about my motivation. I want it mainly for the career, not out of love for academic research. My goal is to work as an economist at a central bank or in similar roles where a PhD is basically required. I'm not aiming for an academic career.
That makes me think a PhD only makes sense at a top program. If I'm doing it purely as a career investment, five years at a mid-tier place seems hard to justify. But with my grades and background, I'm not sure top European programs are realistic.
My questions:
With this profile, plus the traineeship, what are my realistic chances at good European PhD programs?
Does the "top program or nothing" logic hold for central bank research careers, or do central banks hire PhDs from mid-tier programs too, especially with prior central bank experience?
Is career motivation alone a red flag, for admissions or for getting through the program?
Are there other paths I should consider?

I am trying to clearly understand the tools used by the Fed and what they accomplish. If you can explain them in simpler terms, I would be grateful. But as far as I understand (based on equation MV = PY, where P, the price level is what the Fed wants to control through their tools for controlling inflation if I understand correctly),

1. The old way, the fed would buy or sell treasury bills/bonds from/to banks. So this would directly control the "money supply" M, right? What I don't quite understand is that how does this incentivize banks to buy or sell back the bills/bonds to the fed?

2. The new way, the fed controls interest on reserve balance (IORB) (not sure if there are other tools as well). This kind of makes sense where the banks would have a interest rate for the loans they give to customers, greater than the IORB because they can already get IORB by keeping all the money at the Fed. Is my understanding correct? And which part(s) of MV = PY does this tool control? Is it the velocity of money or money supply (if so, how)?

3. When and why does the Fed actually create "new money"? As far as I understand, if there is a constant amount of money in a country, the fed can still control the "money supply" through their tools without needing new money. So why and when and how often would they actually create "new money" and how does this "new money" get into the economy? And is there sometimes any need for "destroying" money (but I guess this is just equivalent to reducing money supply)?

Are these tools global i.e., used by central banks in other countries as well? I would greatly appreciate if you could help me understand these in more detail. Thank you!

Hi. Sorry if this has already been asked.

Before the slower possible transition to new humanistic industries, what happens to our current standard of living/birth rates if AI replaces a large majority of our workforce?
Are there any theoretical books on this?
Thanks