# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Anki Cozmo, is an AI toy robot with a big brain and even bigger personality. Cozmo is always ready to play and learns more as you hang out.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
AUTOMATION Automation: The Industrial Revolution of the 21st Century Pros & Cons Automation: Short-Run & Long-Run Projections Conclusion There will be job losses due the implementation of automation in most industries. However, Automation will improve our skilled labor force, education system, and ultimately society as a whole.

# data[].attributes.body
Luisa Medina

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How does the market for Crude Oil affect

# data[].attributes.body
You sell  20 ____________________per month. Your monthly total revenue is $5,000. The marginal cost of making a _____________is $200. In order to maximize profits, You should

# data[].attributes.body
Now you are selling 500 units of your product at a price of $8 per unit and earning a positive profit, then..

your AR is …

your MR is…

your TC is

# data[].attributes.body
Suppose your firm is producing Q=500 units of output. The marginal cost of the 500th unit is $17, and the average total cost of producing 500 units is $12. You sell your output for $20. If the marginal cost of producing the 501st unit would be $19, producing and selling the 501st unit would increase (or decrease) your profit by__________
At Q=499, the total cost __________

# data[].attributes.body
1. Is the food industry a perfectly competitive market?  Explain why.
2. How does a food industry firm determine the quantity that maximizes profits?
3. When might a food industry firm shut down in the short run?  Exit the market in the long run?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Professor Graham MacGregor, chair of Action on Sugar, says on Wednesday that excess sugar consumption is leading to health concerns which threatens to bankrupt the NHS. Action on Sugar carried out tests on more than 100 popular hot drinks and found some had as much as 25 teaspoons of sugar in per serving. Photograph: SWNS

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
'Food industry is slowly poisoning us': Action on Sugar speaks out on research - video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Professor Graham MacGregor, chair of Action on Sugar, says on Wednesday that excess sugar consumption is leading to health concerns which threatens to bankrupt the NHS. Action on Sugar carried out tests on more than 100 popular hot drinks and found some had as much as 25 teaspoons of sugar in per serving.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The food industry has a large influence on consumerism. Organizations, such as The American Academy of Family Physicians (AAFP), have been criticized for accepting monetary donations from companies within the food industry, such as Coca-Cola. These donations have been criticized for creating a conflict of interest and favoring an interest such as financial gains.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.entities[].name
Illuminati Pharmaceutical Death Industry Exposed

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Know How Food Industry Poisoning Us In The Name Of Profit

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's a must see about the food industry poisoning us in the name of profit. In Food Inc., filmmaker Robert Kenner lifts the veil on US's food industry, exposing the highly mechanized underbelly that's been hidden from the American consumer with the consent of US government's regulatory agencies, USDA and FDA.

# data[].attributes.body
Valentines day makes people spend their money on flowers, food, teddy bears, roses etc.. and creates a boost in the economy industry.
"As the first major consumer holiday of 2016, Valentine's Day could provide a positive boost in spending our economy needs," National Retail Federation CEO Matthew
http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/data-mine/2016/02/11/valentines-day-spending-set-for-record-after-economic-progress

# data[].attributes.body
Consumer v-day spending on the decline since 2007.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
People lavish attention on their loved ones on Valentine's Day. In 2018, they are spending more than in 2017. Valentine's Day will contribute $19.6 billion to the economy, according to the National Retail Federation. That's more than the $18.2 billion spent last year, but slightly lower than the record $19.7 billion spent in 2016. It's more than the $18.9 billion spent in 2015, the $18.6 billion spent in 2013, and the $17.4 billion spent in 2014.

That's good news for the economy. Consumer spending drives almost 70 percent of the output. That makes it the largest component of gross domestic product.

Who's Doing the Spending

More than half (55 percent) of the population will celebrate Valentines' Day. It's up a bit from the 54 percent who celebrated last year. It's fewer than the 63 percent who celebrated in 2007.

But they are spending more. In 2018, they will spend $143.56 per person compared to $136.57 in 2017. It's a little less than the $146.84 each spent in 2016. But it's more than the $142.31 spent in 2015, and the $133.91 spent in 2014.

Men spend nearly twice as much as women: $196.39 per guy versus $99.87 per gal. That's because men are, on average, higher earners. Those making $50,000 a year or more will spend $169.32 each, versus $109.14 per person making less than $50,000.

That reflects the trend toward greater U.S. income inequality since 2000.

Those who derive income from stocks, bonds, and other investments have prospered more than wage-earners. Also, well-paid manufacturing jobs have gone to low-cost countries like China. Firms replaced workers with robots in other jobs.

Demographic trends also affect spending on Valentine's Day. The proportion of older people is rising.

They are less likely to celebrate the holiday. Younger people, who still try to impress potential mates, participate more than older, more settled folks. Nearly two-thirds of those between 25-34 celebrate the holiday, and 60 percent of those between 18-24. Less than half of those between 55-64 celebrate, and only 44.7 percent of those 65 and older.

Top Five Valentine's Day Purchases

More people shop for less expensive gifts, proving the adage that it's the thought that counts. Here are the top five gifts, the percent who buy them, and how much they spend in total..

Least Popular Gifts

The least favorite gifts are also the least romantic. Only 19 percent buy clothing, spending $1.9 billion. Just 16 percent buy gift cards, paying $1.4 billion.

Gifts for Pets

More than a third of Millennials have pets. It's more than any other age group. They especially love to splurge on their pets on holidays. This Valentine's Day, those age 25 - 34 will spend $12.70 each. That's three times more than those aged 35 - 44, who will spending just $4.08. Those age 65 or older spend the least ($1.46) on their animal companions.

Where They Shop

More shoppers visit department stores (35 percent) than discount stores (32 percent). Online has captured more shoppers, with 29 percent using Amazon and the like. But 19 percent still go to specialty stores, and 17 percent stop by the florist's shop. Retailers have stocked the shelves with deals in anticipation of value-conscious shoppers.

Mobile Device Use Is on the Upswing

Just like Black Friday and Cyber Monday, shoppers use their mobile devices to share the love on-the-go. Over half of smartphone owners use them to purchase their gifts. More than a third use them to research products, prices, and retailer information. They also redeem coupons and purchase products with their device.

What the Other Half Does

Almost half of the population aren't celebrating Valentine's Day in the traditional sense.

But about one-third of them are doing something. For example, 11.5 percent are giving themselves some love by buying something special. Almost 10 percent are getting together with family or friends. Almost four percent are rebelling against the holiday by purchasing an "anti" Valentine's Day gift.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Shoppers Feeling the Love This Valentine's Day

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
People lavish attention on their loved ones on Valentine's Day. In 2018, they are spending more than in 2017. Valentine's Day will contribute $19.6 billion to the economy, according to the National Retail Federation. That's more than the $18.2 billion spent last year, but slightly lower than the record $19.7 billion spent in 2016.

# data[].attributes.body
http://www.restaurantbusinessonline.com/ideas/consumer-trends/valentines-day-second-busiest-day-year

# data[].attributes.body
Jessica Carnes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Valentine's Day Spending Statistics & Trends

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Get a better grasp of consumer behavior during Valentine's Day with statistics and historical trends pertaining to the year's romance day.

# data[].attributes.body
Valentine's day and Mother's day are the two busiest days in the restaurant industry.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The economics of the Valentine's Day rose

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Nothing says I love you like an arbitrarily fixed number of uniformly coloured flowers wrapped in cellophane and sold at a 50% price premium. Right?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Common wisdom among seasoned diners is that there are two times each year when you really don't want to find yourself in a restaurant: New Year's Eve, and Valentine's Day. Amateur nights, the thinking goes, with dining rooms that are packed to the gills with bridge-and-tunnelers you might rather not eat next to. Plus, don't most chefs load up on prix fixe, no-choice menus to beef up profits and gouge their captive audiences? Turns out, not really. In talking to people in the industry, it seems Valentine's Day - which, in case you forgot, is this week - isn't necessarily the blockbuster moneymaker that everyone assumes.

The biggest economic factor is completely dependent on the calendar. Valentine's Day does mean a full dining room, so in years when February 14 falls earlier in the week, nights when dining rooms might not otherwise be packed, there is a healthy boost to profits. "Not double," says chef Joel Hough of Il Buco and Il Buco Alimentari, "but you do much better." Yet during years such as this one, when Valentine's Day falls on a Saturday, it doesn't automatically translate to more money. In fact, some chefs say it means a loss. "One-hundred percent, we make less on a Saturday Valentine's Day than a regular Saturday," says Abram Bissell, the chef at the Modern.

Others agree that weekend Valentine's Days don't yield a big bump. "You see a little bit of a spike of people getting a nicer bottle of wine, but it's not so substantial," says Gabriel Stulman, whose restaurants will offer a couple of specials but otherwise stick to business as usual. "It's not like, Oh, wow, we're doing so much business. "

One part of the equation is that diners tend to linger longer than they might on typical nights, making it difficult to turn tables quickly. "You don't want to rush people out," Hough says. "You want people to enjoy their experiences." He says that Il Buco handles about 200 diners on a typical Saturday, but on Valentine's Day, the restaurant will only see 150. "But," he adds, "you make that up with the prix fixe."

Ah, the Valentine's prix fixe menu - a divisive strategy, among both diners and operators. For some owners, offering only a single set menu is a way to guarantee each cover will be profitable. And, chefs say, it's also a chance for them to do something a little different than they might otherwise. "It goes against what we do on a day-to-day basis," Hough says (reservations for Il Buco's $110 menu booked up a month ago). "It's exciting because it gives me an opportunity play around."

But even the economics of a prix fixe can be difficult if a chef chooses to lard up the menu with pricey aphrodisiacs. "Yeah, your check average is higher, but your food cost is also higher," Hough says. "You're putting caviar and oysters and venison on the menu because it's a special occasion."

The problem is that it's tough to force people into a menu full of special foods while also pricing it accordingly: "You can never mark up truffles what you'd need it to cost," Bissell points out. "People would say, 'I'm not gonna pay that much for a black rock from the ground, no matter how much I love it." But he also points out you can't put together a Valentine's menu and not offer something like truffles, so he has to face up to the reduced profitability: "I absorb some of that."

Bissell sees the Valentine's menu as something of a loss leader, though - a chance to impress people enough to hopefully convert them into regulars. "I know I have 'this much' money to work with, but if I write my menu based on that, then I'm focused on profitability, not what's going to blow someone's mind; especially with holidays, we want people building memories."

Less charitable operators, however, do understand that even on a Saturday, there are strategies to employ in order to maximize profitability. The first is to turn the night into an event even beyond the holiday itself. Nobody has been more successful at that this year than Zahara Tangorra, who owns Cobble Hill's Brucie, and received a ton of press for the Kimye-themed meal she'll host this year. (There will be rump roast and a butt-shaped ice luge.) She says she'll see 300 covers this Saturday, as opposed to the usual 200. "We never do prix fixe - I don't like it," she confesses. "But from a kitchen standpoint, we can make sure we have the best quality. It's hard to do double a normal busy night à la carte."

Other owners - especially at the smaller, neighborhood places people tend to think of as "romantic" anyway - say offering only a special menu isn't worth alienating regular customers. "We don't do anything different," says Buvette's Jody Williams. "We are forbidden from doing heart-shaped anything. I just want to stab myself." For her, the secret to taking advantage of the holiday comes in the form of increased sales during the very early or, especially, very late hours of the night. "From midnight to 2 a.m., everyone will come by for tarte tatin; we'll prep a couple more bowls of chocolate mousse," she says. "People are on a date, and things are going well, and they're thinking, What's next? "

As everyone takes a different approach to handling the holiday, some operators just seem resigned to the Valentine's traditions: Diners expect to go out and have a set menu with some bubbly, so why not just let them have it? "I really see that day as a service," says Ivan Orkin, who will offer a small set menu at Ivan Ramen. (Yes, you can do a ramen prix fixe on Valentine's day.) For $85, people can get a half-bottle of Champagne, some apps, ramen, and a cute goodie bag full of hard-to-find Japanese sweets. "We just thought to put it into a package and make it a fun event."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Surprising Restaurant Economics of Valentine's Day

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Common wisdom among seasoned diners is that there are two times each year when you really don't want to find yourself in a restaurant: New Year's Eve, and Valentine's Day. Amateur nights, the thinking goes, with dining rooms that are packed to the gills with bridge-and-tunnelers you might rather not eat next to.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
People lavish attention on their loved ones on Valentine's Day. In 2018, they are spending more than in 2017. Valentine's Day will contribute $19.6 billion to the economy, according to the National Retail Federation. That's more than the $18.2 billion spent last year, but slightly lower than the record $19.7 billion spent in 2016. It's more than the $18.9 billion spent in 2015, the $18.6 billion spent in 2013, and the $17.4 billion spent in 2014.

That's good news for the economy. Consumer spending drives almost 70 percent of the output. That makes it the largest component of gross domestic product.

Who's Doing the Spending

More than half (55 percent) of the population will celebrate Valentines' Day. It's up a bit from the 54 percent who celebrated last year. It's fewer than the 63 percent who celebrated in 2007.

But they are spending more. In 2018, they will spend $143.56 per person compared to $136.57 in 2017. It's a little less than the $146.84 each spent in 2016. But it's more than the $142.31 spent in 2015, and the $133.91 spent in 2014.

Men spend nearly twice as much as women: $196.39 per guy versus $99.87 per gal. That's because men are, on average, higher earners. Those making $50,000 a year or more will spend $169.32 each, versus $109.14 per person making less than $50,000.

That reflects the trend toward greater U.S. income inequality since 2000.

Those who derive income from stocks, bonds, and other investments have prospered more than wage-earners. Also, well-paid manufacturing jobs have gone to low-cost countries like China. Firms replaced workers with robots in other jobs.

Demographic trends also affect spending on Valentine's Day. The proportion of older people is rising.

They are less likely to celebrate the holiday. Younger people, who still try to impress potential mates, participate more than older, more settled folks. Nearly two-thirds of those between 25-34 celebrate the holiday, and 60 percent of those between 18-24. Less than half of those between 55-64 celebrate, and only 44.7 percent of those 65 and older.

Top Five Valentine's Day Purchases

More people shop for less expensive gifts, proving the adage that it's the thought that counts. Here are the top five gifts, the percent who buy them, and how much they spend in total..

Least Popular Gifts

The least favorite gifts are also the least romantic. Only 19 percent buy clothing, spending $1.9 billion. Just 16 percent buy gift cards, paying $1.4 billion.

Gifts for Pets

More than a third of Millennials have pets. It's more than any other age group. They especially love to splurge on their pets on holidays. This Valentine's Day, those age 25 - 34 will spend $12.70 each. That's three times more than those aged 35 - 44, who will spending just $4.08. Those age 65 or older spend the least ($1.46) on their animal companions.

Where They Shop

More shoppers visit department stores (35 percent) than discount stores (32 percent). Online has captured more shoppers, with 29 percent using Amazon and the like. But 19 percent still go to specialty stores, and 17 percent stop by the florist's shop. Retailers have stocked the shelves with deals in anticipation of value-conscious shoppers.

Mobile Device Use Is on the Upswing

Just like Black Friday and Cyber Monday, shoppers use their mobile devices to share the love on-the-go. Over half of smartphone owners use them to purchase their gifts. More than a third use them to research products, prices, and retailer information. They also redeem coupons and purchase products with their device.

What the Other Half Does

Almost half of the population aren't celebrating Valentine's Day in the traditional sense.

But about one-third of them are doing something. For example, 11.5 percent are giving themselves some love by buying something special. Almost 10 percent are getting together with family or friends. Almost four percent are rebelling against the holiday by purchasing an "anti" Valentine's Day gift.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Shoppers Feeling the Love This Valentine's Day

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
People lavish attention on their loved ones on Valentine's Day. In 2018, they are spending more than in 2017. Valentine's Day will contribute $19.6 billion to the economy, according to the National Retail Federation. That's more than the $18.2 billion spent last year, but slightly lower than the record $19.7 billion spent in 2016.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Lady Gaga's FULL Pepsi Zero Sugar Super Bowl LI Halftime Show | NFL

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It's being called the greatest Super Bowl in history: the only one to have run into overtime, the one with the most passing yards, the greatest point deficit ever overcome in any Super Bowl, and all adding up to a nail-biting conclusion that stunned the world.

I would say the same thing about the jaw-dropping halftime show. Lady Gaga's performance struck all the right notes, put her awesome talent on display, and illustrated the mighty power of technology and art in the digital age. I would even go further and say that the show contained a subversively true message: despite all that is being tweeted from the Oval Office, it is music, art, technology, and consumer culture that make America great.

Gaga's greatness is not based on executive orders, threats, vote counts, promises of or belligerent attacks on the media. This was the most awesome message of the show, one that served as a subtle rebuke to the political obsessions that afflict the culture today.

Consider how much value her art brings to the world. It is international and not merely national. Here music flows over borders without tariffs or claims of parasitism. Her greatness is not based on executive orders, threats, vote counts, promises of or belligerent attacks on the media. It depends not on acquiring and exercising power but rather on delighting consumers, staying fashionable, reinventing herself again and again, all in the service of others who are in a position to approve or disapprove the absence of threat or compulsion.
Art Pop
The delightful feature of pop music is its inseparability from the audience response. In fact, one of Gaga's many contributions to art is fully to realize and celebrate that true art is not just about the performer. It can live in isolation but only in a truncated form: it becomes a mere abstraction with only intellectual value. The fullness of art is realized when the audience response is regarded as integral to the creative experience itself. Thus the title and theme of her album Artpop. The popularity becomes the art itself, as both a test and an illustration of its value.

The more ordinary consumers (rather than empowered elites) are in control, the more art and production in general approaches the ideal of universal human service. Social and aesthetic value are inseparable, says she. It is the creed she lives by, and it has served her and us well. But while the theory has been explicit in her work, the idea is implicit in the whole of the experience of mass consumer culture.

And indeed, America has distinguished itself over more than 100 years in being a world leader in film, music, dance, and all the arts, precisely because of the embrace of the theory of art that Gaga represents: the unity of performer and audience in a single experience.

It's a thesis that would have caused Romantics of the 19th century - elites who seethed in disgust at the rise of consumer culture - to gasp in horror. Surely, they said, capitalism would destroy art and replace it with what T.S. Eliot summed up as a "wasteland." But that in fact is not what we see. Eliot's nightmare never came to pass. The opposite is true: the more ordinary consumers (rather than empowered elites) are in control, the more art and production in general approaches the ideal of universal human service.

What happened at this halftime? She demonstrated that her art is capable of achieving what politics cannot. Beginning with patriotic themes, she gradually moved toward universalist themes centered on individualism, human achievement, and freedom itself. As the New York Times it,

Wearing a shiny, silvery, big-shouldered sci-fi bodysuit and matching high-heeled boots, with a glittery mask painted around her eyes, Lady Gaga was lowered through the air, on suspension cables, into NRG Stadium in Houston, showing off a trapeze-like flip. And she started belting her hits, with a nod to the local audience: 'Poker Face''announced, 'I want to hold 'em like they do in Texas.'... but most of the show was simply about full-tilt pop fun.

And all of this followed an eye-popping display of a drone army in the sky, dancing in formation and forming a beautiful American flag. To pull it off even required special approval from the FAA! Wired :

It's probably first time you've seen 300 drones flying in formation, but it's almost certainly not the last. The technology underpinning the Intel Shooting Star drone system is fascinating in and of itself, but its potential applications are even more so. The same drones that accompanied Lady Gaga will one day revolutionize search-and-rescue, agriculture, halftime shows, and more.

One media line on Lady Gaga's remarkable performance at the Super Bowl 2017 halftime was that it wasn't "controversial." The observation is probably inspired by last year's Beyoncé performance that dealt so directly with race and political struggle - and so inspired resistance in an election year. However, looked at a different way, Gaga put on display something more revolutionary. It was a mind-blowing demonstration of the art, technology, and talent that is unleashed in a world of freedom and choice.
Enormous Talent for You and Me
For years, I've endured the claim that pop stars like Lady Gaga are purely canned products, produced by machines and designed to manipulate us. That's a hard claim to support in light of what this halftime show displayed. What we see instead is raw, hard-core, hard-earned talent, the product of immense work, a powerful will to win, and vast experience in doing what most of us can never imagine doing: delighting millions of judging, fickle consumers with song and dance. People who imagine that this is easy are the same people who fear starting a chorus of "Happy Birthday" at an office luncheon!

Millions of people worked together to bring us these delights, people we do not know, people we will never meet. How does all this fit in with the Super Bowl? On the field during the game, we observed a different kind of mastery but equally brilliant. We delighted with every completed pass, every long run, every kick, and felt the tension and pressure rise as the clock ticked to overtime and the stakes grew higher and higher. Yes, one team won, but for the rest of us, they were all winners.

And the biggest winners of all were those of us who sat on the sofa with our clickers, chicken wings, and beers, and consumed it all either for free or for a few bucks. What an astonishing indulgence! Millions of people worked together to bring us these delights, people we do not know, people we will never meet, people we can never thank, and yet they are there every day, working for us, sweating it out to improve our lives. They come from everywhere, work in every sector, specializing in as many diverse talents as the people involved.
Obedience or Invitations?
The Super Bowl shows us a different model of social organization, one based not on commands to obey but invitations to enjoy. In the election, we were constantly promised that blessings will flow to us from a mighty hand who wields immense power with great intelligence. Our role is only to vote, pay, obey, and be grateful.

But in the Super Bowl, both in the game and the halftime show, we were shown a different model of social organization, one based not on commands to obey but invitations to enjoy. This was exactly the reminder we all needed right now. Here is the way forward for humanity, peace, and prosperity.

Intellectuals Right and Left give us a million reasons to abandon the system of freedom of choice, market productivity, and mass consumer culture. What 160 million people around the world saw on Super Bowl Sunday is one solid, compelling reason to never turn back.

Jeffrey Tucker is a former Director of Content for the . He is the Editorial Director at the , Distinguished Honorary Member of , and author of five books, most recently Foundation for Economic Education American Institute for Economic Research, a managing partner of Vellum Capital, the founder of Mises Brazil, economics adviser to FreeSociety.com, research fellow at the Liberty.me Acton Institute, policy adviser of the Heartland Institute, founder of the CryptoCurrency Conference, member of the editorial board of the Molinari Review, an advisor to the blockchain application builder Factom Right-Wing Collectivism: The Other Threat to Liberty, with a preface by Deirdre McCloskey (FEE 2017). He has written 150 introductions to books and more than ten thousand articles appearing in the scholarly and popular press. He is available for press interviews via his email.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Lady Gaga's Performance Wasn't "Controversial" but It Was Revolutionary | Jeffrey A. Tucker

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
One of Gaga's many contributions to art is fully to realize and celebrate that true art is not just about the performer. It can live in isolation but only in a truncated form: it becomes a mere abstraction with only intellectual value.