# data[].attributes.body
The Beimen Post Office, located at No. 120, Section 1, Zhongxiao West Road, Zhongzheng District, Taipei City, is a historic building that has stood since the Japanese colonial period, witnessing Taiwan’s transformation from Japanese rule to the Republic of China era.

This building brings to mind the economic concept of administrative monopoly.
Chunghwa Post Co., Ltd. is Taiwan’s only postal service provider, and its monopoly mainly stems from the Postal Act, which stipulates that no private companies may engage in the delivery of postcards, letters, or similar mail items. This legal restriction effectively grants Chunghwa Post an exclusive right to operate postal services, forming an administrative monopoly.

In addition, Chunghwa Post benefits from economies of scale. Its extensive nationwide network and dense service points allow it to lower average costs and build a postal system that is nearly impossible to replace. As a state-owned enterprise, Chunghwa Post is not driven by the pursuit of high profits, enabling it to offer affordable postal services to the public.

Although the idea of privatizing postal services has been discussed for many years, removing the government’s exclusive authorization could jeopardize communication rights for residents in remote areas. Since mail volumes are low and transportation costs are high in these regions, private companies are unlikely to take on such unprofitable operations. For these reasons, Taiwan’s postal system remains under the monopoly of Chunghwa Post today.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo I took on the day that Typhoon Ragasa hit Taiwan. Some students, like me, braved the wind and rain to attend class.

This situation illustrates concepts of opportunity cost and cost-benefit analysis. Opportunity cost represents the potential benefits you miss out on by choosing one option over another, and it includes both tangible costs (like money) and intangible costs (like time or pleasure). To absorb knowledge and earn attendance points, students have to pay the price of risking their umbrellas from being damaged by strong winds, the physical exhaustion of walking against the wind, and the joy of resting in the dormitory. If students think that the benefits of attending class outweigh the costs of braving the wind and rain, they will rationally choose to attend.

Furthermore, I also wonder whether students would still choose to attend if there were no roll call system.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a photo of an ordinary meal. The two types of pasta have different prices, yet the two people didn’t both choose the cheaper one, because we each choose the option that gives us the highest personal utility. We also ordered fries, which shows that the combination of pasta and fries is within our budget line.

# data[].attributes.body
This is the food that I ordered. Initially, I only wanted to buy a cup of coffee, but the clerk told me that the coffee costs NT$200, and the café offers a NT$20 discount if the customer also buys a dessert. Therefore, I ordered one more dessert, which I hadn’t planned to.

This kind of strategy creates a price incentive that affects consumer behavior — by lowering the total cost of purchasing both items, the café encourages customers to buy more and enjoy greater utility. From an economic standpoint, this strategy represents a form of price discrimination and illustrates how discounts can shift a consumer’s choice from buying one product to a combination that maximizes satisfaction within their budget.

# data[].attributes.body
Group projects are common in college, but I sometimes find them troublesome. This photo was taken when I was working on a group project in our school library. Since I was annoyed by this stuff, I come up with the idea: Is doing this project really in my best interest? What if I don’t do it?

I set up a simple game-theory model to think of this question. There are two players in this game, me and another group member. Each of us can choose to either do or not to do the project. If we do the project, we won’t fail the course (0 points), but we lose some of our free time (-20points). If one person doesn’t do the project, that person will save time (40 points), while the person who do the project loses time (-40 points). In this case, neither of us fails the course (0 points). If both of us choose not to do the project, we both save time (40 points), but fail the course (-100 points).

The best outcome is when one person does the project and the other doesn’t. This is the game of chicken. However, it occurs when two players don’t know about other’s decisions. Therefore, I should choose not to do the project since I know my partner is doing it, which will maximize my payoff. However, I still chose to do it because of my sense of responsibility and consideration for my teammate, even though I really don’t want to. This shows that people are not rational at all, we may act against our own best interests due to moral or psychological factors.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
This scene comes from the well-known Chinese drama Empresses in the Palace (Hougong Zhenhuan Zhuan), a story set in the imperial harem during Emperor Yongzheng’s reign.The palace, in this context, functions less like a place of romance, and more like a closed, hyper-competitive market where power is the only scarce resource and everyone is fighting for a share.In this scene, we have two key players:Consort Hua – the old dominant force, favored for years, powerful and confident.Zhen Huan – the rising newcomer, gaining influence because the emperor now favors her.Naturally, conflict is inevitable. Both players face strategic choices. For Hua, the options are: “Suppress” or “Act friendly.”For Zhen Huan, the choices are: “Endure and stay quiet” or “Fight back.”Now, if Hua chooses to act friendly and Zhen Huan chooses to stay low-key, both sides actually reach the most efficient outcome — the highest total payoff.BUT here’s the problem: Hua gets a higher individual payoff by suppressing, and Zhen Huan gets a higher individual payoff by fighting back.So even though cooperation is better for both as a whole, each one has an incentive to betray that cooperation.As a result, they fall into a classic Prisoner’s Dilemma, and the game ends in a Nash Equilibrium — one that’s individually rational, but socially inefficient.In other words, the palace isn’t just about emotions, jealousy, or aesthetics it runs exactly like a strategic game, where each player does what’s best for themselves, and collectively everyone ends up worse off. And that is Game Theory perfectly hidden inside a costume drama.

# data[].attributes.body
The people in the photo are waiting in line to take the bus from the school dormitory to the classrooms. On weekdays, there are always a lot of people lining up—the queue in the photo only shows part of it, and the entire line is usually about 60 to 70 people long. Each bus can carry about 25 passengers, and the whole trip—from boarding, driving to the destination, and getting off the bus—takes around five minutes. Since there are two buses in operation, there’s a bus roughly every five minutes.

Besides taking the bus, the only other option is walking, which takes about 10 to 15 minutes. However, Taiwan’s weather is extremely hot, and walking makes you sweat so much that your clothes get completely soaked. Since we’ve studied economics, we know that we should choose the option with the lower opportunity cost.

There are two options: taking the bus or walking. We should first analyze their costs and benefits. The advantage of taking the bus is that it’s faster; the downside is that it costs money and you might have to wait in line for a long time. The advantage of walking is that it’s free, but it’s slower and more tiring. The bus fare is 2 NTD (less than 0.1 USD), which can be ignored. Walking causes fatigue and sweating, but you also sweat easily while waiting in line, so let’s assume the physical cost is about the same.

Based on this analysis, the only factor that really matters is time. According to the information above, if you have to wait for two buses, taking the bus is slightly faster than walking. But if you have to wait for three buses, walking becomes faster. Therefore, to determine which option has the lower opportunity cost, you need to check whether there are more than 50 people in line. And I’ve already figured out a quick way to estimate that—but there’s no way I’m telling you what it is.

# data[].attributes.body
These photos were taken a week before Halloween, when Krispy Kreme Doughnuts held a small lottery game and gave out discount coupons for original glazed doughnuts. I was lucky enough to win a promotion that allowed me to get one extra box of original glazed doughnuts for just NT$10. Thanks to this event, I finally got to enjoy the doughnuts I had wanted for a long time.

According to the Law of Demand, when doughnuts can be purchased at a lower price, consumers are more willing to buy more of them. This shows the inverse relationship between price and quantity demanded.

In addition, the lottery activity increased the fun of buying and actually changed consumers’ perceived utility of the product. Even though the doughnuts themselves did not change, the entertainment and psychological satisfaction from the event made consumers more willing to purchase, effectively shifting their utility curve to the right.

It also reflects the concept of Price Elasticity of Demand. Since doughnuts are not necessities, consumers are more sensitive to price changes. When the price decreases, the quantity demanded increases significantly. Combined with promotional activities, this helps boost total sales. For the business, it is a pricing and marketing strategy aimed at increasing total revenue.

However, while eating doughnuts, the Law of Diminishing Marginal Utility can be observed. The first doughnut brings the greatest happiness and satisfaction, but as more are eaten, the additional satisfaction decreases — the second or third doughnut may even start to feel too sweet or less enjoyable.

# data[].attributes.body
To increase total revenue, the cinema adopted an incentive strategy by giving away free posters to attract more viewers. They even added special designs and craftsmanship to make the posters more valuable and appealing to consumers. Moreover, the cinema released different exclusive poster versions at specific times, creating artificial scarcity and encouraging people to watch the movie multiple times to collect them all. This marketing tactic effectively increased consumer demand and marginal utility for repeated viewings.

Personally, I went to see the movie as well. However, by the time I watched it, all the special posters had already been given out. Although I really wanted to get one, I had to consider my opportunity cost—spending more time watching the movie again would have meant less time to study for my midterms. From an economic perspective, my decision not to return to the cinema reflects a rational choice, balancing the marginal benefit of obtaining the poster against the marginal cost of lost study time.

# data[].attributes.headline
Free pineapple cake and tea from SunnyHills 

# data[].attributes.subject
Free pineapple cake and tea from SunnyHills 

# data[].attributes.body
SunnyHills offers free pineapple cake and tea, allowing consumers to experience the product quality before purchasing. This method could increases consumers' willingness to pay because after trying the product, they feel it's worthwhile and has greater value. When consumers are actually willing to pay more than the actual selling price, consumer surplus is generated.

On the other hand, SunnyHills prices its pineapple cakes at NT$50 each, classifying them as high-priced items. Because brand image and product quality enhance customers' willingness to pay, the company can sell it at a higher price, gaining more producer surplus.

Therefore, while free samples increase costs, they expand consumer surplus, increasing overall demand. Besides, higher unit prices allow companies to obtain higher producer surplus. The combination of these two factors creates a win-win situation.

# data[].attributes.body
Ulove is a restaurant located on Nanjing E. Rd, boasting its novel and delicious dishes. Its most popular foods include scallop risotto and prawn spaghetti. Upon arrival, my mother and I ordered a variety of dishes, including two cups of soft drinks. The very first sip tasted amazing, but it gets increasingly mid as we drank it till the end. Such phenomenon can be described by diminishing marginal utility. We finished the first couple of foods yet still hungry, so we ordered another plate of risotto. However, the final plate wasn’t so satisfactory, which leaves my father and I pretty upset. Undeservingly, this meal costed us 3,900, which, apparently, is way too expensive in our opinion. This can be described by it not being a combination that lies on the demand curve despite not exceeding the budget.

# data[].attributes.body
Chiikawa is a popular manga series in recent years, loved by many for its adorable characters. The one in the picture is Usagi, my favorite character. This hot spring version isn’t particularly popular, and I bought it for only about NT$350 at the time.

However, some of the more sought-after versions can sell for NT$500–1000 even as secondhand items. Many people might think spending that much money on a small plush toy is wasteful, but for fans who truly love it, it feels totally worth it.

This illustrates the concept of utility — the satisfaction or happiness consumers derive from goods and services. Utility is highly subjective, while some people may find the price of these plushies unreasonable, others feel it’s a great deal because of the joy they bring.

It also demonstrates the idea of consumer surplus. If a fan’s willingness to pay — the value or utility they perceive from the plushies — is higher than the actual selling price, they will feel the purchase was worthwhile. The difference between willingness to pay and the actual price is the consumer surplus, representing the extra satisfaction gained from each unit of transaction.

Overall, utility is subjective, and consumers decide their willingness to pay based on personal preferences. As long as the satisfaction gained from a product exceeds the amount paid for it, a consumer surplus arises — along with the feeling that the purchase was “worth it.”

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Recently, I decided to buy a refrigerator, and instead of spending the original price of 6,000, I found a second-hand one for just 3,500. From a microeconomic perspective, this choice is perfectly explained by the substitution effect and the income effect. Since the new fridge was more expensive, the second-hand fridge became a cheaper alternative that could still fulfill the same need—so I substituted the new one with the used one, which is exactly the substitution effect. At the same time, by spending only 3,500 instead of 6,000, I saved 2,500, which means I had more real income left to spend on other things I enjoy (like snacks, streaming subscriptions, or pretending I’m saving money)—this is the income effect. So overall, I didn’t just buy a used fridge; I practically became a walking example of consumer theory in microeconomics.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a notification I received when I was attending a music festival called Rock in Taichung. It is a free music festival that anyone can join. However, during the final performance, the venue was flooded with people, and as a result, everyone there received this notification.

When too many people enter the venue, it can lead to safety hazards such as stampedes, so the organizers have to limit the number of attendees to maintain safety and order.

This situation shows that free music festivals can be considered congested goods. They are competitive , because when more people attend, the experience or comfort level for others decreases. Yet, they are not exclusive, since everyone is allowed to join without paying or being restricted by membership or ownership.

In other words, while the event is open to the public, the limited capacity of the venue makes it susceptible to congestion once attendance exceeds a certain level.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo was taken when I was having a barbecue with my friends during the Moon Festival. I realized that this tradition of barbecuing can be connected to many economic phenomena.

For example, barbecuing during the Moon Festival was not originally a traditional custom; it became popular because sauce brands successfully created demand through advertising, turning it into a regular festive consumption behavior. This illustrates the power of advertising effects and induced demand.

During barbecues, the demand for complementary goods such as charcoal, meat, grills, and sauces rises simultaneously, forming a complete “barbecue economy chain.”

However, barbecuing also generates smoke and noise, which create negative externalities for nearby residents.

In addition, the money and time spent on barbecuing represent an opportunity cost — some people consider the opportunity cost of barbecuing at home too high and instead choose to eat grilled food at restaurants.

# data[].attributes.body
In Taiwan, based on my observations, I have noticed that most people prefer to raise so-called popular dog breeds such as Shiba Inus and Corgis, while breeds like Bull Terriers are relatively less common. This phenomenon actually reflects underlying economic principles.

From the perspective of supply and demand, Shiba Inus and Corgis are like mainstream products in the market. Their large breeding numbers and stable supply channels form a complete industry chain. However, the high popularity of these breeds also drives up market prices, creating a typical case of demand-pull inflation.

In contrast, niche breeds like Bull Terriers, with limited supply and a specific target audience, maintain a relatively stable price range. This aligns with the market segmentation theory in economics. Every consumer unconsciously conducts a cost-benefit analysis. When people choose a Shiba Inu, they are not just buying a pet but also conforming to mainstream societal aesthetics. On the other hand, choosing a Bull Terrier comes with higher opportunity costs, including the communication effort required to explain the breed’s characteristics and the social disadvantage of having fewer like-minded owners.

From the perspective of utility theory, for specific groups, the marginal utility brought by a Bull Terrier far exceeds that of mainstream breeds. Their unconventional appearance and distinct personality satisfy their desire for uniqueness. This decision-making behavior itself is akin to avoiding oversaturated red ocean markets in the consumer market and instead exploring one’s own blue ocean strategy.

From another perspective, although popular breeds come with more comprehensive care information and medical resources, the surge in their ownership has led to diminishing marginal utility. When Shiba Inus can be seen on every street corner, they no longer feel special. In contrast, while Bull Terriers require more time and effort to research and care for, they provide higher psychological satisfaction. This choice fully aligns with the decision-making model of a rational economic agent—they clearly understand that they are not seeking to follow trends but rather the unique value derived from scarcity.

True value does not lie in following the choices of the majority but in finding what best suits oneself. Every consumer makes optimized decisions based on their preferences, resulting in a diverse and vibrant pet market.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a yearly event held by Taiwan Mobile Co., Ltd at sun moon lake. It's a free music festival for everyone to attend. There will be a band and some famous singers to perform lots of famous songs. Also you can enjoy listening to the music while the firework is playing. Immersing in this kind of feast is definitely a gorgeous plan for you to go.

Since it is a huge event, which attracts around 20 thousand to 30 thousand people, the externality will occur. First, the positive externality, for the hotels, restaurants, shops around there, they don’t have to pay the cost to promote the event, but they can gain a lot by increasing number of customers coming to join this event. However, there will also have negative externality, the noise, pollution, and heavy traffic will undoubtedly affect the neighbors, causing them a big trouble. Also, there will be demand and supply effect. The event will attract people, in the short run, causing the demand curve to move rightward, some supply remain the same (hotel), so the price will be higher. In the long run, the producers see the profits are rising, the supply will gradually increase, causing the quantity to increase. The market will occur a new equilibrium point.

For me, the benefits are far more than the costs. Since it’s a free and an excellent place to enjoy the natural beauty, a good chance to escape the hustle and bustle, and a quality time with my family, this event has become my favorite thing throughout the year and become our family’s tradition. Although it cost some time to get there, it always makes us feel relaxed and want to go back again and again. This event makes me understand more behind the economics. And I can feel that economics exists everywhere.

# data[].attributes.body
The photo shows a good example of a public good. It depicts a small park located near a residential area and an elementary school. A community park is generally non-excludable and non-rivalrous, meaning anyone can use it, and one person’s enjoyment does not reduce another’s when the park is not crowded.

However, during holidays, many families spend time there together. The facilities often require waiting in line; for example, when someone is using the slide, others must wait until it is free.

The next economic concept is externalities. Parks create positive externalities, such as giving children opportunities to make friends, strengthening family relationships, and improving the overall appearance of the neighborhood.

However, when the park becomes overcrowded or noisy, negative externalities may arise. For instance, office workers who wants to sleep in on weekends might be disturbed by children’s loud voices.

Lastly, in terms of social welfare and equity, community parks promote equity by providing recreational opportunities for people of all income levels, enhancing social inclusion, and improving overall social welfare.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a photo of Beipu Old Street.
The core value of the old street lies in its nostalgic atmosphere and immersive experience. Visitors are willing to pay slightly higher prices for snacks and souvenirs, which indicates that the utility they gain from consumption on the old street is higher than that from other locations. This suggests that the value of the old street does not only come from the goods themselves, but also from the cultural and emotional experiences it provides.

The shops along Beipu Old Street often feature strong local characteristics and a retro style, with Hakka culture being its most distinctive element. These cultural traits serve as important forms of differentiation that attract tourists.

However, while the development of the old street stimulates local economic growth and commercial activity, it may also reduce the quality of life for local residents due to increased crowds, noise, and higher living costs. These effects represent the social costs of old street development. In addition, as tourism expands, land and rental prices rise, increasing business costs and leading to higher product prices—resulting in a phenomenon of local inflation.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo displays the economic dynamics of the event organizer inviting the Korean group NMIXX to participate, which resulted in a surge in demand.Integrating the Korean group into the guest list and achieving a substantial increase in sales is a successful example of an outward shift of the Demand Curve in economics. The essence of this strategy is the value enhancement of the event ticket—a Private Good possessing excludability and rivalry—through the immense appeal of the highly popular Korean group.The Korean group's significant appeal generated substantial additional value for the ticket, dramatically elevating the Marginal Utility of the purchase for consumers. For their fan base, this boost in satisfaction motivated them to be more willing and even eager to buy tickets at the existing price level. On a supply-demand graph, this is visualized as the overall Demand Curve shifting to the right, successfully converting previously unsold unused seating capacity into real revenue, thereby providing the organizer with considerable incremental profit.More importantly, given that the event did not increase ticket prices, the economic phenomenon known as the Crowding Out Effect was effectively eliminated. The core fans of the event (sports enthusiasts) were still able to attend at a reasonable price, while the Korean group's fans also gained smooth entry. This operation successfully maximized economic benefits without compromising the rights of the original customer base, achieving a win-win situation for all parties involved.

# data[].attributes.body
While having lunch today, I noticed that there were no pork dishes available. This is because Taiwan has recently experienced an outbreak of African swine fever. During the meal, I overheard the restaurant owner chatting with other customers, saying that the number of pigs in the market has significantly decreased and prices have risen sharply. This has also affected other types of meat, such as chicken. The price of chicken in some markets has started to increase as well, and the demand for chicken has gone up.

According to what we’ve learned in economics, the supply curve for pork shifts to the left, causing the equilibrium price of pork to rise and the equilibrium quantity to fall. From what the owner described, we can infer that chicken is a substitute for pork. Since the change in the quantity of chicken divided by the change in the price of pork is greater than zero, the demand curve for chicken shifts to the right, leading to an increase in both the equilibrium price and the equilibrium quantity of chicken.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo shows a park near my apartment. This park serves as an example of a congestible public good. People can enter this park freely without paying fees or tickets, making it non-excludable. When the park is crowded with people, the marginal cost of accommodating an additional person rises, therefore, rivalry exists between different users. After a certain congestion point is reached, every additional person in the park reduces the benefit of existing park users, in this case, congestion creates negative externality, which can be internalized by government intervention or bargaining.

# data[].attributes.body
The image shows a bookstore near National Chengchi University about to close. When a bookstore is about to close, it wants to clear out its inventory within a limited time. To stimulate demand, the store lowers prices to encourage more people to buy. Books are considered "non-essential goods," and consumers are more price-sensitive. Therefore, when a bookstore offers a 30% discount, the willingness to buy may increase significantly. For the store, leaving inventory incurs storage costs and opportunity costs (e.g., space could be rented out). Clearance sales are a strategy for the store to minimize losses and free up resources. Discounts are not just a pricing strategy but also a psychological pricing mechanism. A "30% off clearance sale" creates the impression of a limited-time opportunity (scarcity effect), increasing the impulse to buy.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo was taken in the basement, which is the only place in the dormitory where residents can throw their trash for recycling. However, since it is a common area that doesn’t belong to anyone in particular, people tend to neglect its cleanliness and hygiene. This situation illustrates the concept of public goods for dormitory residents, and the resulting problem is an example of a negative externality in economics. To address this issue, the first solution I thought of is to punish students who improperly dispose of their trash in the recycling bins. This approach is known as internalizing the externality, which is another concept in economics.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo was taken at Taipei Dome on November 2, 2025, capturing the scene at the CPBL Taiwan Series Game 2, and this game drew a sold-out crowd of 40,000 fans. The scene presented in this photo, from the "sold-out" phenomenon to the ticket pricing structure, reflects some theories of microeconomics.

First, the relationship between ticket prices and the number of seats demonstrates the concept of "perfectly inelastic supply." In this event, the "good" being sold is a seat at the Taipei Dome, and the "supply" is fixed at 40,000 seats. Critically, this supply cannot be changed in the short term. Regardless of whether the organizers set the price at $500 or $5,000, the number of available seats remains exactly 40,000; it will not increase just because the price is higher. Graphically, this is represented by a vertical supply curve. When supply is fixed, the sole determinant of price becomes "demand." The demand for this game was clearly immense, driven by the combination of the Taiwan Series championship, the popularity of the home team (CTBC Brothers), and the new, comfortable, and air-conditioned Taipei Dome. This powerful demand chasing a fixed supply resulted in high ticket prices and a sold-out event.

As for why the prices themselves varied so dramatically even in a sold-out market, this involves the concept of "price discrimination". It simply refers to a firm charging different prices to different consumers for essentially the same good—in this case, the experience of watching the game. The team management understands that even with a fixed supply, the "willingness to pay" differs significantly among fans. Some fans seek the best possible view and a premium experience, willing to pay $2,800. Others, like myself, may be more focused on simply getting in to enjoy the atmosphere, with a willingness to pay closer to $900. If the club had set a single price, such as $1,500, they would have lost the customers only willing to pay $900, while simultaneously losing out on the extra $1,300 those willing to pay $2,800 would have spent. Therefore, by segmenting the stadium into different price zones, the club can "capture" as much consumer surplus as possible from each group, thereby maximizing its profits.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo shows me studying in a café instead of in the library. Although the café costs more money for drinks and food, it provides a more comfortable and motivating environment for me to study. I can take short breaks, talk to friends, and stay focused for longer hours.

From an economic point of view, this choice reflects the concept of budget constraint and utility maximization. Within my limited budget, I chose the option that gives me the highest satisfaction. The extra money I spend is the cost, but the benefit is a better study atmosphere and higher productivity.

It also involves opportunity cost. By choosing to study in a café, I give up the free but less efficient option of studying in the library. However, since the benefit of better focus outweighs the extra cost, studying in a café becomes the rational and most efficient decision for me.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo shows the menu of a barbecue restaurant. As the portion size of meat increases, the total price also rises, but by smaller and smaller amounts. This reflects the Law of Diminishing Marginal Utility: as customers eat more, each additional portion brings less extra satisfaction, so their willingness to pay per unit decreases. For example, in the beef short plate set, increasing from 100 g to 200 g costs an extra 100 NT dollars, while increasing from 200 g to 300 g costs only 70 NT dollars. Although the portion increases by the same 100 g, the additional cost becomes smaller, showing that the price increases at a diminishing rate — just like diminishing marginal utility.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a photo I took while watching a basketball game in Taiwan. The main economic ideas related to this event are supply and demand and externalities. These ideas can clearly be seen when comparing the time when Jeremy Lin was still playing to the period after his retirement.

When Jeremy Lin was active in the league, ticket prices and demand were much higher. Many fans wanted to see him in person, so games often sold out quickly, and the overall market for basketball became more competitive. This shows how a single player’s popularity can shift the entire demand curve for the sport. After his retirement, the overall demand for tickets dropped slightly, and teams had to rely more on promotions or community events to attract fans. It’s a perfect example of how consumer demand reacts to changes in the product — in this case, the “product” being the basketball experience.

The idea of externalities also plays a big role. During Lin’s career, his presence created positive externalities: nearby restaurants, shops, and transport services benefited from large crowds, and his fame attracted media coverage that helped promote Taiwanese basketball internationally. Even after retirement, the lingering influence of his career continues to inspire young players and keeps fan interest alive. Of course, popular games can also bring negative externalities, like traffic jams and noise, especially around stadiums.

In short, the difference between the “Jeremy Lin era” and the time after his retirement shows how economics is deeply connected to sports. Player influence, consumer behavior, and social impact all work together to shape real-world economic outcomes.

# data[].attributes.body
Last week, I went to an all-you-can-eat sukiyaki restaurant with my high school friends. Everyone was excited before we started eating because it had been a long time since we last had sukiyaki. As soon as the meal began, we eagerly ordered several plates of meat, trying to make the most of the time limit. The first bite was incredibly delicious and satisfying, but as we continued to eat more, each additional serving brought less pleasure. Eventually, as we became full and the flavor started to feel heavy, eating another bite no longer made us happy and even felt burdensome. This perfectly illustrates the Law of Diminishing Marginal Utility in economics, which means that as the quantity of consumption increases, the extra satisfaction from each additional unit decreases.

Interestingly, even when everyone said they couldn’t eat another bite, our chopsticks kept moving slowly. This behavior reflects the Sunk Cost Fallacy, where people act irrationally because they want to get their money’s worth after paying for the buffet. In reality, the money spent should not affect our future decisions, but many people still let it drive their actions.

If it were you, would you stop eating once you had reached maximum satisfaction and achieved the greatest utility within your budget? Or would you keep eating to feel that you had made the most of your payment, even if your total satisfaction eventually turned negative?

# data[].attributes.body
This photo was taken outside Dream Plaza, a newly opened shopping mall near Taipei City Hall MRT Station. The bright lights and the modern design easily draw attention, and even at night, people continue to walk in and out, creating a lively urban atmosphere.

Dream Plaza illustrates the concept of monopolistic competition. Inside the mall, many stores sell similar types of products—restaurants, cafés, and fashion brands—but each adds its own twist to stand out. A café might compete through interior design, a clothing shop through style and image, while a restaurant might use menu creativity to attract customers. These differences reflect product differentiation, which gives each firm some control over price and customer loyalty, even though other alternatives are close by.

From the consumer’s perspective, this place also represents utility maximization. Every visitor decides how to spend limited time and money among many possible activities: eating, shopping, or just enjoying the environment. Each person weighs the satisfaction they expect to gain against their budget and preferences before making a choice.

All in all, I couldn’t help but wonder how much of what we call “choice” is shaped by marketing and atmosphere. Are we really maximizing our utility—or simply responding to how these firms design our decisions?

# data[].attributes.body
This is a photo of one of my required courses, Comparative Government and Politics. It’s a three-hour course that usually allows a 10-minute break every hour.

During each break, many students choose to leave the classroom due to boredom. This behavior can be explained by the concept of opportunity cost. For those opting for skipping class, staying in the classroom means giving up the chance to relax or engage in more enjoyable activities. Since the opportunity cost of staying is higher than that of leaving, rational students choose the option that offers greater personal satisfaction, which in this scenario means leaving is the better choice.
Moreover, leaving classrooms can also be interpreted through the lens of utility maximization. Each student seeks the option that provides the highest level of satisfaction given their individual constraints.

# data[].attributes.headline
Choosing Between Convenience and Sustainability

# data[].attributes.subject
Choosing Between Convenience and Sustainability

# data[].attributes.body
In one of my courses this semester, we are encouraged to use reusable tableware instead of disposable ones. The teacher designed a reward system that creates positive economic incentives—students who use eco-friendly tableware frequently can earn a free silicone bowl, and the top three users receive additional prizes. This system motivates people to change their consumption behavior toward sustainability. However, there are also opportunity costs involved. Carrying and washing the tableware requires extra time and effort, while disposable utensils are more convenient. Therefore, each student must weigh the marginal benefit of getting closer to the reward against the marginal cost of inconvenience. Some may find the benefit worth the effort, while others may not. This situation demonstrates how individuals make rational choices based on costs and benefits. It also reflects how small incentives can nudge people to adopt environmentally friendly habits through behavioral economics principles.

# data[].attributes.body
It’s a photo of Pokemon cards on the open shelves I saw in Japan. Usually, a pack of cards sells 165~550 yen with 5 or 10 cards per pack, but why can these cards sell at such high price? I think it includes two economic concepts: scarcity and speculation, utility.

First, there are grades of Pokemon cards, which range from c to UR, and the grades present their scarcity. For example, in one box that contains 100 cards, you may get 30 C cards, 5 HR cards, 1 secret rare card and if lucky, one hyper rare card. For those collectors and Pokemon lovers, they would definitely want as many rare cards as they can get, which creates trading markets. Just as normal market, people can’t usually predict what generation of packs or what cards that people like, so those who hold rare cards can have higher pricing power. Besides, the company often announces special events or tournaments that provide super limited cards instead of trophies and further stimulate the market to be more activate.

As the paragraph mentioned above, the Pokemon cards market is built due to the demand (collectors and lovers) and supply (card holders). In recent years, as the Pokemon games and anime becoming popular globally, the number of collectors are increasing rapidly, which shows that Pokemon cards can create high utilities, so that people keep buying more cards in their budget constrain, pushing the cards prices be higher.

# data[].attributes.body
In this photo, you can see official idol dolls next to some handmade doll clothes that fans buy online. This is something I often see in fan culture around me , people first buy the “official” doll from the entertainment company, and then they go online looking for cute outfits made by independent creators.

From a microeconomics perspective, the dolls and clothes are complementary goods. Once someone buys the doll, they usually end up buying outfits too, so the demand moves together. The official dolls basically come from one producer, so that market shows monopoly power — the company controls the price and branding, and fans still buy it because they get emotional value and high consumer utility, not just the physical item. In other words, the willingness to pay is high because the product represents their idol.

On the other hand, the doll clothing market feels more like perfect competition. There are many sellers offering similar styles, and fans compare designs, quality, and price before choosing. Sellers need to be creative to differentiate their products and attract buyers.

There’s also a network effect. When fans share cute doll photos and outfits online, more people get interested, and this increases demand on both sides — for dolls and for fan-made clothes.

Even though this is just a small hobby, it shows how real life reflects core microeconomics ideas — from market structure to how emotions influence consumer choices.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo of a bottle of goat milk was taken at Qingjing Farm. It illustrates several economic principles. First, it reflects comparative advantage, as the mountain environment of Qingjing is better for raising goats and producing high-quality milk.  Second, it illustrates consumer preference, people are willing to pay a higher price for products with a trusted or natural image. Finally, the price of this milk can be explained by supply and demand, limited local production and high tourist demand lead to a higher equilibrium price. These principles together explain the economic value behind the product. （I don't like the taste of goat milk since I was child, and I want to give him another chance when I come to Qingjing Farm, but I still don't like it after drinking it…

# data[].attributes.body
This is a picture of a casual rainy day in Zhinan Rd.. Initially, I took the photo to complain about how bad the weather is in Taipei with my friends living in ChiaYi. However, I noticed a connection between this photo and microeconomics. (They are both depressing, jk)

This photo was taken on a Monday afternoon. Under normal circumstances, the street is usually so crowded that you cannot walk properly without bumping into someone. However, when the weather condition was terrible, there were only a few pedestrians, and shops were closed.

Invoking theories of microeconomics, bad weather conditions often shift the supply curve leftward (as shown in the photo, where many shops are closed). On the other hand, the demand curve also shifts leftward because students prefer to order UberEats. This results in a lower equilibrium quantity while the price level remains relatively stable.

Now, I shall have sufficient microeconomic evidence to lodge a complaint against this unpredictable weather in Taipei.

# data[].attributes.body
This picture reveals many economic principles hidden in everyday life. The most obvious example is the beautiful beach. It's an open space that everyone can use for free, representing public property. When I visited as a child, this beach was actually full of trash, indicating that there were external costs to consider. Only in recent years, with the hiring of cleaners, has it transformed into this magnificent sight.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo shows our campus’s famous Samoyed dog, Xiao-Xiong (“Little Bear” in Mandarin), who is loved by many students at our school. This photo was taken during Halloween, and I was lucky to capture this moment.

Xiao-Xiong often walks around campus, and whenever she does, students stop to take pictures or pet her. Her presence creates a positive externality, since people experience happiness and stress relief just by seeing her—even though no one pays for it. The joy she generates is non-excludable and non-rivalrous, meaning everyone can enjoy it simultaneously without reducing others’ enjoyment.

However, her owner manages a social media account for Xiao-Xiong, sharing photos and videos that attract thousands of followers. In this process, the once public happiness becomes partly a private good. Attention, affection, and even sponsorship opportunities are turned into economic value. This transformation demonstrates how markets can internalize externalities—turning spontaneous public joy into a commercial asset.

Beyond economics, Xiao-Xiong also represents how emotions and social interaction can become part of the modern attention economy. Her cuteness not only spreads happiness but also creates digital engagement, which can be monetized. It makes me wonder: when positive externalities like joy become commodified, do we lose part of their shared essence, or does commercialization help sustain and expand them through market incentives?

# data[].attributes.body
I took this photo on Halloween night in Taipei. The streets were packed with people celebrating and taking photos, creating a fun festival atmosphere but also extremely slow movement and heavy traffic.

This reflects a negative externality: everyone enjoys the event, but each extra person increases crowding and inconvenience for others. Since entering public space is free, more people show up than the socially efficient level. It also shows herd behavior — once you see everyone going, it’s hard not to join.

In the end, it was chaotic but interesting. Just a reminder that sometimes we trade comfort for experience, and that’s part of city life.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo was taken in the hallway outside a general education class at the beginning of the semester. The hallway was filled with students who hadn't been able to enroll in the course and were trying to sign up for extra spots. Only 40 spots were available, but there were far more than 40 people in the photo.

This scene illustrates the concept of "supply and demand." The remaining seats inside the classroom represent a "limited supply," while the students outside representing "high demand." Because the price (tuition) is fixed and cannot be freely adjusted, a "supply shortage" occurs—the number of students wanting to take the course far exceeds the number the professor can accept.

How can the university bring the market to equilibrium? Should professors offer more courses of the same type? Or should the maximum number of students allowed in a course be increased? Or should a "bidding system" be adopted to more efficiently allocate these scarce spots?

# data[].attributes.body
This picture is a private purchasing group on social networks. I would like to use this photo to explain two economic concepts: one is the impact of simple manufacturer costs on market prices; second, the market deviates from the one-price law caused by the asymmetry of information between buyers and sellers, which ultimately generates arbitrage opportunities. First of all, there is a private group on the social network, which will have some special buyers who regularly go to hypermarkets in various places, such as Linkou Outlet, etc., these places usually have activities to buy multiple products to get high discounts. Although most of these stores sell styles and colors that are less popular in the market. But sometimes there are some popular models that are much cheaper than those found in sports stores near your home. I think the reason is that these hypermarkets are usually located in remote areas, resulting in lower rental costs for manufacturer, resulting in low price. Then I found that few people know about this , and the price of popular models (models with higher demand) plus purchasing fees is still far lower than the prices of sporting goods stores near my home and even e-commerce platforms. So I use this information as I have, but online buyers may not necessarily have it (information asymmetry). Sitting at home, clicking on my mobile phone to buy from the buyer at a low price, and then selling it at a lower price than on the e-commerce platform, creating arbitrage opportunities.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a photo of a table stacked high with many plates from a conveyor belt sushi restaurant. Every time I go eat conveyor belt sushi with my friends, we jokingly compare who can eat the most plates — sometimes saying that whoever eats the fewest has to treat the others. But after thinking about it, I realized this actually relates to economics.

When we eat the first plate of sushi, we’re still very hungry, so that plate brings us a great amount of satisfaction — the marginal utility is at its highest. As we continue to eat more and more plates, our feeling of fullness increases, causing the marginal utility to gradually decrease. With each additional plate, the marginal utility (MU) declines.

By the time we’re competing to see who can eat the most plates, those last few plates go far beyond our original sense of satisfaction. We’re only eating them to “beat” our friends and earn the title of the “big eater.” At that point, our MU is close to zero — or even negative. In the end, this simple sushi-eating contest perfectly illustrates the law of diminishing marginal utility — the more we eat, the less satisfaction we gain, until eating becomes more about pride than pleasure.

# data[].attributes.body
This is Da-Hsian Library, one of our university’s most famous landmarks known for its modern design and academic atmosphere.

A library is not only a place of learning but also a living example of economic principles in action. One of the basic ideas in economics is the concept of scarcity—resources such as books, study space, and time are limited. Students in the library must decide how to allocate their limited time among reading, research, and rest. This reflects the principle of opportunity cost: every hour spent studying here is an hour that could have been spent elsewhere.

The library also demonstrates the idea of public goods. It provides access to information and study areas that everyone can use without reducing others’ ability to benefit. This represents an efficient use of shared resources, funded by the institution for the common good.

# data[].attributes.headline
Fans formed a long line to get the gifts. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Fans formed a long line to get the gifts. 

# data[].attributes.body
This is a picture I took before a baseball game, everyone was waiting in line for the gift which limited in quantity. The gift is a jersey and a clapper, because all the fans bought the ticket not only for the game, but also for the gifts. The gifts implies the incentives for the fans to buy the ticket, and the fans were willing to dedicate their time to line up for the gifts. But when I get the gifts, I felt the time for lining up was worth. If I didn't get the gifts, I think my utility for this game won't be maximized. Because I lost something I should have, and I think the price of the ticket had included the cost of the gifts. After I got those gifts, it still some time before the game start. The fans will go to their merchandise department and maybe buy some goods of their team, it also a strategy of the team to boost the sales. After seeing this baseball game, I realized that there's economic knowledge can be found every where. Even in the baseball field.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo shows me after winning the first prize in a lottery from Japan called "Ichiban Kuji. " Ichiban Kuji is a type of lottery where consumers pay a fee first, typically between NT$250 and NT$450 to draw a ticket. However, since the top-tier prizes are limited, the probability of winning one of them is no more than 5%. In other words, the price you pay is not equivalent to the value of the item you actually receive.

Despite the fact that Ichiban Kuji has a negative expected value, it means that any rational consumer should avoid this type of product. Nevertheless, they still remain incredibly popular.

From an economic perspective, this phenomenon illustrates human complexity and irrationality. In many economic models, we assume the principle that "people are rational and utility-maximizing." However,  Ichiban Kuji shows that in reality, this is not always the case, and a portion of consumption is irrational, ironically.

# data[].attributes.body
Last month, my friends and I went to the National Palace Museum to see an exhibition about Dream of the Red Chamber, a famous novel written during the Qing Dynasty in China. At the exhibition, we saw many Qing Dynasty artifacts, such as tableware, decorations, and accessories. The picture shows some of the exhibits — purses used in the Qing Dynasty. We also learned more about the story behind the novel. It was a touching exhibition.

In fact, we had originally planned to visit another exhibition, but there were too many people waiting in line. Therefore, we changed our plan and still had a wonderful experience.

From an economic perspective, making choices requires weighing opportunity costs. While the other exhibition was more renowned, it required a greater investment of time and money. This exhibition, though smaller in scale, offered a more comfortable viewing experience without long waits. Therefore, we chose to see the Dream of the Red Chamber exhibition, with the opportunity cost being the chance to view the more famous paintings.

# data[].attributes.body
My friend and I bought two cups of Starbucks’ Caramel Frappuccino during a buy-one-get-one-free promotion. I did not buy drinks from Starbucks very often because it cost me a favor, while the price of other beverages is around 40 to 80 dollars. (Starbucks sell their Frappuccino for 150 dollars or more.) As the promotion effectively offered a 50% discount and increased the utility I derived from Starbucks drinks, we chose to purchase Starbucks beverages instead of drinks from other shops. This demonstrates that, assuming the same budget, the Starbucks combination provides higher utility, leading to a movement along the budget line — a substitution effect — as we shift our consumption from other brands to Starbucks.

# data[].attributes.body
At my college, I use the elevators in the Social Science Building almost every day. After a while, I started to notice that these elevators seem to follow certain patterns. For example, when all of them are waiting on the second floor—which happens surprisingly often—and I press “up” on the first floor, it’s always the rightmost elevator that comes down first. Even when the distance is the same, the system seems to have some sort of fixed order in how it responds.

One day, I was waiting on the ninth floor to go down, and I found something interesting. There were two elevators above the ninth floor, both going down. But only one of them stopped for me—the one that already had someone inside who pressed “9”. The other one, even though it was closer, didn’t stop. The system decided it was more efficient to let the elevator that was already stopping there to pick me up rather than making both of them move extra.

That’s when I realized this is actually economics in real life. The elevator system is trying to save energy and maximize efficiency, but at the same time, that choice can lead to longer waiting times for people like me. In other words, it sacrifices fairness for efficiency, or individual convenience for collective benefit.

The elevators, in a way, are like a small economic system. They allocate limited resources—like time and electricity—to achieve the greatest overall outcome. And that’s exactly what economics is about: making choices, balancing trade-offs, and finding the best possible use of what we have.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo shows a fully occupied free parking lot. From an economic perspective, a parking lot has characteristics similar to a public good, but it does not fully meet the definition. In general, public goods are non-excludable and non-rivalrous. Although a free parking lot is largely non-excludable—anyone can use it without restriction—it becomes rivalrous once all spaces are taken, since one car’s use prevents others from parking. Therefore, it is more accurately described as a common resource or a quasi-public good. This photograph depicts how many public facilities, when faced with limited capacity, may encounter congestion and a decrease in efficiency as utilization increases. It also emphasizes the significance of developing proper regulations and management systems to balance accessibility and resource allocation in the delivery of public services.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo was taken by me at the dragon boat club I participate in off-campus, capturing team training fiercely in a severe downpour, the day right before a major competition. Looking at this photo, I realize that our collective decision to continue paddling is a perfect, personal demonstration of Rational Behavior guided by Marginal Analysis in Microeconomics. On a normal training day, the decision to keep going is based on a standard balance of Marginal Benefit (MB) versus Marginal Cost (MC). However, with the race less than 24 hours away, the values of these margins are dramatically altered. The final pre-race session offers an irreplaceable benefit—the last chance to polish our synchronization, solidify our race strategy, and build crucial psychological unity. This last effort is the marginal gain that could differentiate us from competitors, translating into a higher probability of winning. Because the reward for success is so high, the MB of this final practice is virtually maximized. Conversely, the Marginal Cost is severe, including the risk of illness, muscle fatigue going into race day, and general safety hazards in the storm. Despite this tangible discomfort and high risk (MC), we made the rational choice to continue. This means our team implicitly calculated that the irreplaceable competitive advantage and mental preparedness (MB) of this final session exceeded the severe cost (MC). Our powerful external incentive—the imminent competition—was the key factor that shifted the entire equation. Furthermore, the months of time, money, and effort already invested into the season represent enormous Sunk Costs. Our persistence is not a result of the Sunk Cost Fallacy; instead, it reflects a forward-looking rationality. We understood that stopping now would risk minimizing the returns on all our past investments. By focusing only on the high marginal returns that could be secured now, we were acting as rational agents, determined to maximize our ultimate chance of success. This photograph, for me, is a personal snapshot of a economic decision: accepting extremely high Marginal Costs in pursuit of the ultimate, maximized Marginal Benefit—winning the competition.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo shows that the queue at a drink shop during the lunch time before its shutdown. Although this shop had always been popular in the area, a queue had never been seen like this before. This was caused only because that the shop was about to close, but there were no other discounts or promotions reasons to attract customers.

By economic concepts, when consumers except they will no longer be able to purchase the same product after the shop closes, the product become scarcity. Therefore, when other conditions are constant, the consumer demand for the shop's products increases.

On the other hand, because it decided to close, the shop does not change the prices in the short term in responding the demand increased. Also, it will not increase its supply due to its shutdown. During this period, supply is perfectly inelastic, represented by a vertical supply curve.

Overall, the price and supply are fixed, but demand incresed. The excess demand creates a shortage for the shop's products. As a result, the suddenly rapid increase in customers results in queuing. At the same time, it can be expected that some consumers won't get the product they wanted.

Furthermore, this situation represents a short term change at a single and small shop within a local area. Therefore, it will not affect the equilibrium of similar products, that is, the overall drink market.

# data[].attributes.body
A vending machine is an economic activity that combines convenience and efficiency. Due to the high demand for beverages in schools, businesses install vending machines to increase supply. Through automated sales, vending machines reduce labor costs while satisfying consumers’ immediate purchasing needs. From an economic perspective, vending machines improve transaction efficiency, shorten the circulation time of goods, and allow businesses to operate even in areas with high rents or labor shortages. Overall, vending machines embody the rational choice of both supply and demand sides in pursuing efficiency and convenience, representing a modern model of microeconomic activity.

# data[].attributes.headline
Nighttime Markdown Economics in Convenience Stores

# data[].attributes.subject
Nighttime Markdown Economics in Convenience Stores

# data[].attributes.body
Around 6:30 every evening, convenience store clerks will paste stickers on items that are expiring in hours, showing 20% off from 7 to 8 pm and 35% off after 8 pm. We can learn some economic lessons from the phenomenon. First, price elasticity of demand and market segmentation: consumers have different willingness to pay. Daytime, time-pressed shoppers are less price-sensitive, while evening shoppers—such as students or budget-conscious buyers—are more price-sensitive. Using time as a sorting tool, the store sells at full price to willing-to-pay customers during peak hours and offers discounts later to attract price-sensitive customers, thereby increasing total revenue. Second, low salvage value and marginal cost considerations: once near-expiry items pass their date, their salvage value is almost zero and fixed costs are sunk. As long as the markdown price covers marginal costs (e.g., packaging, payment fees), selling one more unit raises profit and may also stimulate complementary purchases (such as beverages), boosting overall revenue. Finally, consumer surplus and social welfare: discounts allow marginal consumers—who would not buy at full price—to purchase, increasing consumer surplus. They also convert potential waste into actual consumption, reducing negative externalities such as trash and carbon emissions. Stores balance the depth and timing of discounts to align profit incentives with reducing waste and improving social welfare.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo was taken in the school library discussion room.Using the school discussion room is exclusive. Once someone reserves a room,others cannot use it.This system helps prevent free-riding behavior,as student ID card is required to access the room.If someone using the room creates noise, it results in a negative externality. On the other hand, the school provides a free space for students to study and discuss projects, it generates a positive externality.

# data[].attributes.body
Scratch cards may seem like a simple game, but they reveal interesting economic insights. They show how governments can raise funds through voluntary spending rather than taxation. For individuals, buying a ticket provides excitement and hope, even when the odds of winning are low. This reflects human behavior that values emotion over pure rationality. Moreover, when profits are used for social welfare, scratch cards can contribute to society. Overall, they combine entertainment, psychology, and economics in a fascinating way.

# data[].attributes.headline
Why professors stay in silence as they become students ?

# data[].attributes.subject
Why professors stay in silence as they become students ?

# data[].attributes.body
Student ID: 110208003 吳佑安 Department of Economic, 4th.

(This article is translated by GPT, Mandarin version is written by myself. )

This photo was taken during a summer SROI workshop I joined while working at my university’s USR Project Office. Funny enough, the “students” you see here were actually professors (or research assistants) from different universities.

For years, many professors have been complaining about how college students seem indifferent in class—always on their phones, coming in late, disrupting lessons, or refusing to answer questions. But when these same professors became “students” for a day, most of them acted exactly like the ones they used to criticize—quiet, distant, and barely interacting with the lecturer.

From an economic point of view, classroom interaction often lacks incentives. There’s usually no real reward for speaking up, and if you give a wrong or imperfect answer, you might get an awkward laugh or a cold response from the professor—it’s just not worth the risk. On the other hand, when professors create bonus-point systems, encourage questions, and keep an open attitude, the number of interactions in class tends to rise noticeably.

這張上課照片是我在暑期因校內USR計劃辦公室工讀參與SROI工作坊所攝，照片中的「學生」是來自各大學的「教授（或研究助理）」。迄今為止，諸多大學與教授發表關於大學生冷漠的課堂互動：低頭滑手機、遲到或干擾課堂、不願回答問題等，然而當這些教授參與工作坊成為學生時，他們大多數如同研究中冷淡的學生，幾乎不與講師互動。

從經濟學角度來看：課堂與教授互動大多時候缺乏誘因（獎勵機制），甚至如果回答錯誤或不完善更可能被揶揄與被教授冷淡回應，成本過大；當然，如果教授在課堂制定加分機制和鼓勵同學提問及對學生持開放態度，同學互動數量亦有所提升。

# data[].attributes.body
This photo shows the braised food I had near NCCU last night. When choosing what to eat, I decided to wait in line because this stall is both inexpensive and delicious. From an economics perspective, waiting in line reflects my consideration of opportunity cost. I gave up the chance to eat faster or use my time for something else. Instead of better taste and lower spending. This means the utility I gained outweighed the time cost. Additionally, this meal produced an external effect. The strong smell of the braised food lingered in my room after I brought it back, which is a negative externality. So, this simple dinner was not only about satisfying hunger, but also a small example of economic decision-making in everyday life.

# data[].attributes.body
"Closing Down

Clearance Sale: Offer from 30%"

There’s a bookstore right across from our school that will close down on December 31st.

Why are the shops near our school shutting down? Is it because the demand isn’t enough to support the supply? Or businesses in this area never make enough profit to survive?

Take this bookstore as an example. These days, people have started to stop using paper notebooks. Most of them prefer taking notes on their phones, tablets, or laptops. The demand for physical writing materials has dropped significantly, makes suppliers can't sell enough products to cover their costs, and in a world like that, it becomes harder for sellers to stay in business. The only choice they can make is to close down their business, which is understandable, yet still a little heartbreaking.

# data[].attributes.body
A few days ago, I went to a Japan products fair in Xinyi District, looking for something to eat. I came across a famous tamagoyaki (Japanese omelet) stall that was selling a set of tamagoyaki (about four pieces) with toppings for 280 NT dollars. I thought that was a bit too expensive, so I didn’t buy it. Later, I noticed someone holding single pieces of tamagoyaki, so I went back to check and realized they were also selling single pieces for 70 NT dollars each. Even though I still felt that 70 dollars are a little bit expensive , it looked so tasty that I decided to buy one.

Actually, if you divide the price by the portion size, the set at 280 dollars is cheaper on average. However, I felt that buying one piece for 70 dollars was more “worth” . The reason is that my marginal utility for tamagoyaki decreases. When I eat the first piece, I feel very satisfied and gain a lot of utility. But when I eat the second or third piece, since I’ve already tried it and I start to feel full, the satisfaction I get is lower. As the quantity increases, the utility I gain decreases.

That’s why the whole set didn’t seem like a good deal to me.

Although the average price per piece is lower, my utility decreases more sharply, so I wasn’t willing to spend that money to satisfy myself further. Actually, after eating the first piece, I thought it was delicious and wanted another one, but the decrease in utility from the second piece was enough to make me unwilling to pay another 70 dollars.

# data[].attributes.body
One evening, my classmates and I went out for dinner and happened to walk past a newly opened ice cream shop. The place looked really nice, and the ice cream seemed high quality, but the prices were much higher than what we would normally pay. On any other day, we probably would have just kept walking. But that day, the shop was having a grand opening deal — “buy one, get one free.” Since it made the ice cream much cheaper, we decided to go in and try it.

This simple decision actually reflects some key ideas from microeconomics. First, it shows the Law of Demand: when the price of a good falls, people are more willing to buy it. When the price was high, it wasn’t within our budget, but the promotion lowered the cost, so the ice cream became something we could afford. It also relates to Utility Maximization — with the same amount of money, we were able to get more satisfaction (or utility) than before, since the deal gave us two ice creams for the price of one.

From the shop’s perspective, this is a price incentive strategy. By offering a temporary discount, the store attracts new customers to try their product. Even though the profit per sale is lower in the short term, it helps create awareness and might bring those customers back in the future at regular prices.

In the end, this photo isn’t just a memory of dessert after dinner — it’s also a real-life example of how changes in price and budget constraints affect consumer choices and behavior in everyday life.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a picture of my statistics class at 9 a.m. The highlight of this picture is that, from the perspective of the photo, you can tell I was literally sitting on the floor during the lecture. The reason is that on that day, we were going to have a small quiz after the class. When I entered the classroom late, i couldn’t find any available seats without walking to the front of the classroom. So I joined the other three to four students who were also sitting on the floor to listen to the lecture. However, during the break, we managed to find some remaining chairs to sit on. Usually, the classroom isn’t this crowded because the professor doesn’t take attendance.

From an economic perspective, the seats had a limited quantity (fixed supply), while the number of students who wanted to attend the class surged on the day of quiz. When demand exceeded supply, the number of seats became insufficient, forcing some students to sit on the floor. In addition, taking the quiz served as a strong incentive — students who were usually absent were more motivated by the pressure of missing the quiz, which rapidly increased the attendance rate in a short time.

# data[].attributes.headline
opportunity cost and utility maximization explains why students sometimes skip early morning classes

# data[].attributes.subject
opportunity cost and utility maximization explains why students sometimes skip early morning classes

# data[].attributes.body
Macroeconomics is one of my required courses. It’s a three-hour class that starts at 9 a.m. and usually includes a 10-minute break every hour. Despite the structure, many students often choose not to attend due to fatigue and exhaustion. This behavior can be explained through the economic concept of opportunity cost.

Each morning, We face a decision between two options: waking up early to attend class or staying at home to rest or engage in more enjoyable activities. Attending class means giving up the comfort of sleep or relaxation, while skipping class means missing out on learning and participation. When the opportunity cost of staying home (missing important material and participation) outweighs the cost of attending, a rational student would attend. However, when the perceived benefit of rest and comfort provides greater personal satisfaction, skipping class becomes the rational choice.

This decision-making process also relates to utility maximization. Every student seeks to maximize their overall satisfaction given their individual constraints, such as energy, time, and motivation. For some, the utility gained from additional sleep or relaxation exceeds the utility of attending class, leading them to stay home. In this way, even skipping class can be understood as a rational economic decision guided by personal preferences and perceived benefits.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo is a priority seat on the MRT. Due to the recent controversy between a young passenger and an elderly woman over a priority seat, which sparked widespread discussion in Taiwan, I began to consider the economic relations hidden behind this everyday scene. A priority seat is a form of public goods, which accessible to everyone yet limited in number. Therefore, choosing whether to sit is essentially a decision about how to allocate scarce resources. When individuals focus only on their own needs, those who genuinely require the seat may be deprived of it, causing the classic tragedy of the commons. On the other hand, when someone willingly gives up their seat to those in need, they may lose a bit of short-term comfort, but their action increases the well-being of others and contributes to social harmony, an example of positive externality. However, a person’s real needs cannot always be observed from the outside, and this information asymmetry often leads to misunderstandings or conflict. As a result, society uses stickers, announcements, and moral reminders to create gentle incentive mechanisms that guide people toward choices that benefit the common good. A seemingly ordinary priority seat thus becomes a vivid lesson in economics, reminding us that both rationality and kindness are essential forces in the allocation of social resources.

# data[].attributes.body
The “35% off i-Food” program in convenience stores reflects several important economic concepts. First, discounting near-expiration products reduces waste and converts items that might have generated zero revenue into actual sales, which improves inventory and cost management efficiency for the store. At the same time, consumers obtain the same food at a lower price, meaning their utility remains unchanged while spending decreases, resulting in higher consumer surplus.

In addition, the limited-time and limited-quantity nature of discounted i-Food activates psychological effects such as scarcity and the fear of missing out, making consumers more willing to purchase even if they did not plan to buy originally. For example, during my recent visit to a convenience store, I bought all my food at 35% off simply because the discount made the purchase feel more worthwhile. Although I could have chosen other options, the price difference influenced my decision and increased the likelihood of buying more items.

Therefore, this strategy is not just about lowering prices; it is a business model that combines cost control, consumer incentives, and behavioral economics, producing benefits for both the store and its customers.

# data[].attributes.body
As you can see, it’s a rainy day in NCCU,

and sadly, my umbrella has been cruelly stolen by someone.

From this, I’ve observed some interesting points.

First, it raises the question of how people weigh the value of an umbrella against moral considerations. Taiwanese people are often known for their kindness and honesty. For example, when someone loses a wallet or phone, these valuable items are either turned in to the police or simply left in place. However, smaller items such as umbrellas or helmets are much more likely to be stolen.

I believe this reflects how people balance the value of an object with their moral standards. Because an umbrella is inexpensive and easy to obtain, those who take one feel less psychological burden—it’s seen as a low-cost wrongdoing. When the cost of obtaining an umbrella increases, for instance, assuming that it’s raining outside and one cannot go out without it, the benefit of acquiring a new umbrella seems smaller than the cost or inconvenience of doing so. This raises the incentive to steal an umbrella, leading to more such behavior.

I believe that this kind of externality problem which’s caused by people forgetting to bring their umbrellas, can be addressed through a public goods approach.

For example, we could establish an umbrellas sharing system or install umbrella dryers, allowing people to bring their umbrellas into library and keep umbrellas safely with them. At the same time, shared umbrellas would help those who don’t have one get through a rainy day, thereby reducing the incentive and frequency of umbrella stealing .

# data[].attributes.body
Last weekend, I attended a two-day music festival. Besides enjoying the performances, I also noticed several issues. There were four stages in total, but one of them faced directly toward another stage. As a result, the sound from one performance often interfered with the other, especially when the performer was speaking or playing softer music, which significantly reduced the listening quality.

In addition, this particular stage was oriented toward the outside of the venue, and its volume was quite loud. Because of this, people who didn’t buy tickets could still clearly hear the performances from outside the festival grounds. I found this situation unfair — while paying attendees had their experience disrupted by sound interference, non-paying individuals could enjoy the music for free.

The interference between stages can be seen as a negative externality, since it imposes unwanted costs on other performers and audiences. Meanwhile, the fact that outsiders can enjoy the music without paying represents a free-rider problem. If such issues persist every year, they could lead to market failure, as the festival would not efficiently allocate enjoyment relative to payment.

To address these problems, the organizers should carefully evaluate the placement and orientation of the stages, as well as control the volume levels in future events. Doing so would minimize interference and free-riding, ensuring that those who pay for admission receive the greatest possible enjoyment from the festival.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo shows the coin-operated washing machines in a dormitory. Coin-operated washing machines are closely related to economics. Since users must pay to use them and one person’s use affects others, they are considered private goods. The pricing set by the school reflects the law of supply and demand. If the price is too high, students may choose to wash their clothes by hand or find other alternatives. If the price is too low, the machines may be overused, leading to long waiting times. The washing machines also create both positive and negative externalities. The positive externality is that centralized washing saves water resources, while the negative externalities include noise and space occupation, which may reduce the quality of dormitory life.

# data[].attributes.body
The green option at the top of the image is a commuter monthly pass. By spending only 1,200 TWD (about 40 USD), you can take unlimited rides on the MRT, trains, and buses within four cities in the northern metropolitan area of Taiwan for 30 days. This has saved me a lot of transportation costs as I commute to school every day.

In economics, price affects the quantity demanded. By lowering the cost of using public transportation, the government can encourage people to take public transit more often, which in turn reduces the frequency of driving and helps address external costs such as air pollution and traffic congestion.

However, the government also needs to carefully consider how to set the ticket price. If the price is too low, it may lead to overcrowding or resource waste.

Using economic knowledge, we can analyze how a commuter monthly pass may change consumer behavior and the potential positive and negative effects it could have on society.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo of playing an arcade fighting game can be explained by the microeconomic principle of the budget constraint. The player has a limited amount of money and must decide how much to spend on games versus other activities, such as food or entertainment. This reflects how consumers allocate their income to maximize satisfaction. Each game played provides enjoyment, but according to the law of diminishing marginal utility, the extra satisfaction from each additional game may decrease over time. Therefore, the player seeks a balance where their spending gives them the highest total utility within their budget.

# data[].attributes.body
I took this photo on November 1st at Ultra Taiwan 2025, one of the top outdoor electronic music festivals. The festival is known for its elite DJs, amazing stage setups, and crazy lights and sounds. The place was packed with thousands of fans, all dancing and enjoying the music. From an economics perspective, a few things stand out. First, demand went up: having popular DJs made more people want to buy tickets, which boosted the organizer’s revenue. On top of that, multiple income sources—tickets (general and VIP), sponsorships, merchandise, and food and drinks—helped Ultra stay financially strong and keep expanding every year. Second, there are positive externalities: fans spend money on hotels, food, transport, and shopping, which benefits the local economy. For example, in 2018, Ultra Miami brought in about $995 million, including $168 million in direct spending and 1,834 jobs. But there are also negative externalities: noise, traffic, and trash can bother nearby residents. It shows that big events are fun and profitable, but they also have social costs. Balancing enjoyment and public good is something organizers and society need to think about.

# data[].attributes.body
The “Buy 11 Get 11” promotion significantly lowers the effective price and shifts the demand curve to the right, sharply increasing quantity demanded and transaction volume in the short run. By concentrating normally dispersed demand into a single period, the seller accelerates inventory turnover and boosts one-time revenue. Moreover, the timing of the shopping festival itself creates a signal effect that triggers loss aversion, making consumers feel that not purchasing becomes a loss, which further amplifies short-term demand.

# data[].attributes.body
During a promotion at Seven Eleven, I bought three boxes of Godiva chocolate originally priced at 200 NTD each, but sold at 77% of the price (154 NTD). This discount illustrates the concept of consumer surplus: I gained 46 NTD per box, the difference between what I was willing to pay and the discounted price. Price reductions like this also stimulate demand, attracting buyers who might not purchase at full price. While the retailer earns less per unit, the promotion can increase total sales and enhance market efficiency.

# data[].attributes.body
National Chengchi University(NCCU) sit at a location which usually rain. The mountainous terrain makes the vapor easy to accumulate and eventually become rain drops. This makes sunny day become something like “limited sunshine trial” for the NCCU students and get 24/7 rainy days to have the full experience.

Rains always come at someone’s surprise, it comes fast and also leaves fast. And there is always people forget to bring the umbrella  with them or being scammed by the sunshine in the morning. At this moment, people may choose to steal one from a bunch of umbrellas at the entrance.

These incidents are constantly happen in NCCU. It’s bad because it is at someone’s expense, and illegal with no doubt. Why do people choose to do such diabolical things?

To explain this from the view of economics, by the “opportunity cost”, for a person the opportunity cost of getting wet in the rain is so high or the prospect of getting caught is so low that the person makes the choice to steal the umbrella which is not belong to him. Of course, this is under the assumption that people are rational and their choice are being thoroughly calculated. In some cases maybe people just steal it due to impulse and without much calculation.

We can also explain the incident that it is due to “lack of information”. People don’t really aware of the outcome of stealing (which according to Article 320(general theft) of the Criminal Code: Punishable by imprisonment for not more than five years, short-term detention, or a fine of up to NT$500,000.)

So they don’t include the real downside of stealing into their decision making process.

In conclusion, stealing is bad, and stealing someone’s umbrella when raining is worse, so don’t stealing.

By Joseph

# data[].attributes.body
This is a picture about two drinks I bought from my favorite burger shop last week. Normally, I don’t buy any drinks at this burger shop because I think their drinks are expensive for me when they added to the meal. But last week , they had a buy one get one free promotion, so I decided to buy them. According to the Law of Demand, when the price of drinks became lower, I felt it was more worth it, so I would bought them unusually. This shows how price affects demand. It also shows utility because I got more satisfaction from spending the same amount of money.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo was taken at a stationery store next to our university. In Taiwan, besides restaurants, one of the essentials near any school is a stationery store that sells reference books, supplies, and all kinds of small items. But this particular store is quite special — right next to it, there’s another very similar stationery store. (Though there is actually one more book shop near our school, but it's stationary are too expensive that can't really compete with these two stores in this small market.)I often wonder whether the two are run by the same owner in cooperation, or if they’re engaged in a small-scale duopoly. The products they sell are strong substitutes for each other. Perhaps because of this duopolistic relationship, both stores’ prices are a bit higher than in other areas, but the competition between them prevents any excessive price increases.On this day, however, one of the stores announced it would be closing down and was having a clearance sale. The shop was packed with students, all busy picking out discounted items. It’s easy to imagine that the neighboring store will face two challenging months ahead, as the lower prices have increased demand, and some less rational consumers may even stock up far beyond their actual needs.But after these two months, only one store will remain near our school — meaning it will become a monopoly market. Which also implies that in the future, the store may set prices above marginal cost. How this market will evolve next is something we’re about to find out.

# data[].attributes.body
In this photo, there is a "No Parking" sign on the sidewalk. The sign shows that parking here is not allowed and that The vehicle of the violator will be towed away. I think this sign represents government intervention in the market through regulation. Without the regulation, drivers might park on sidewalks to save time or money, reducing pedestrian space and even compromising safety. This is a negative externality. By imposing fines and towing fees, the government increases the opportunity cost of illegal parking, causing people to internalize the external costs they create, thereby improving social welfare and efficiency.

I wonder how effective these regulations really are. Will increasing fines really reduce illegal parking?Would providing more parking spaces be a more effective method than this punishment?

# data[].attributes.body
It was 10pm and I was studying at Starbucks, but the store was closing. I gathered my books, stepped outside, and was greeted by Taipei’s relentless downpour.

Just as I reached the bus stop, the headlights of my bus faded into the distance. The next one wouldn’t come for 57 minutes. I could take the MRT instead, but that would mean a long, drenched walk home through the narrow streets ,and the pouring rain.

So I stood there for a moment, my umbrella trembling under the rain, and found myself conducting a cost benefit analysis, a small act of rational choice. Should I spend time and energy trudging home, or spend some money to take shelter in a movie theater nearby? Going home would save me the price of a ticket, but a movie offered warmth, comfort, and a few hours of escape.

Comparing the opportunity cost of each decision, I realized that the marginal joy of resting in a dimly lit theater outweighed the savings I’d make by heading home. In that instant, the decision was clear: watching a film was the path to utility maximization.

It was a Monday night, and I guessed there would be few others in the cinema. For most people, the opportunity cost of staying out late was too high. They had early mornings, deadlines, and routines waiting. But for me, since I have no classes on Tuesday, the thought of having an entire theater to myself promised a higher marginal utility.

When I finally stepped into the dark theater, the empty seats confirmed my expectations. At that moment, I knew that within my limited budget and circumstances, I had chosen the option that truly maximized my utility.

# data[].attributes.body
This picture was taken during a general education course right at the beginning of the semester. In our university, students can be added to courses they didn't originally register for if they get the professor's permission. Because of this, during the first and second weeks of the semester, many people line up at the classroom, hoping the professor will open up more spots.

I was one of the people in that line. It was still summer, and everyone was crammed into the stuffy, hot hallway, which was very uncomfortable. But in order to get into this gen-ed course, all of that discomfort seemed trivial.

From a microeconomics perspective, this course is like a "product." The university is the supplier, and the students are the consumers. In reality, the classroom can only hold fewer than forty people; it was impossible for so many people to be in there taking the class at the same time. This represented a severe shortage, where supply fell far short of demand.

The fact that everyone was willing to endure the hot, stuffy environment while waiting for the professor's signature means that the opportunity cost of waiting (the time spent and the discomfort endured) was lower than the opportunity cost of not being able to take the class for the entire semester. This explains why everyone chose to stay in the hallway and wait.

However, the final outcome was: the professor did not approve anyone's add-on request.

# data[].attributes.body
This picture illustrates the free shuttle bus at Yonghe District, New Taipei City.

I think the free shuttle bus is nonexcludable because it is free to everyone who wants to take it—no one is prevented from boarding regardless of payment or identity.

However, it is rivalry because as more people use it, it diminishes others’ use. Rivalry means consumption by one person reduces the availability or quality for others. For example, each additional passenger takes up a seat, increases crowding, and may cause delays or force others to wait for the next bus, lowering the service quality for remaining users.

# data[].attributes.body
This is a photo of the dryer in the dormitory. After washing their clothes, students can choose to air-dry them or use the dryer (NT$10 for 15 minutes). NCCU is located in a rainy area, so it's quite humid. When you choose to dry your clothes, you bear the risk that they won't be completely dry. Choosing to dry your clothes costs NT$20 (which usually results in dry clothes). Based on my observations, more people use the dryer on rainy days, meaning that rain increases the opportunity cost of air-drying, and the chances of clothes not being dry are even greater. Therefore, in most people's minds, the benefit of spending NT$20 to dry clothes is greater than the benefit of air-drying.

# data[].attributes.headline
discounted prices at a convenience store

# data[].attributes.subject
discounted prices at a convenience store

# data[].attributes.body
In the picture, we can see a corner of a convenience store called 7-Eleven, which is ubiquitous in Taiwan. Many people buy their meals at convenience stores because the overall cost of living in Taipei, the capital of Taiwan, is relatively high. In addition, the food options on campus are often quite monotonous.

As a frugal student, I would like to share how to purchase meals at a discounted price when you are on a tight budget. 7-Eleven offers several discount periods throughout the day, with different percentages off the original price. These time-based discounts reflect two key economic concepts.

First, the idea of price elasticity of demand can be clearly observed in daily life. Since students have limited income, they tend to pay close attention to their daily expenditures. As a result, they are highly sensitive to price changes. This explains why discussions about discount periods and updated food prices are popular topics on Taiwanese social media.

Second, the fact that the discount increases as the day goes on illustrates the concept of price discrimination. The later it gets, the lower the price becomes. By adjusting prices according to the time of day, 7-Eleven attracts different groups of consumers to purchase food at various times, effectively reducing leftover inventory and maximizing revenue.

# data[].attributes.body
The scene captured in the photograph, featuring Halloween-themed decorations like a skull, a tombstone, and sunflowers with skulls, can be viewed through the lens of consumer theory and the demand for leisure and goods.

A consumer, or the organizer of this display, had to choose between various ways to allocate resources for the event. Imagine a consumer initially planned to purchase premium expensive decorations. The items in the photo represent a relatively cheaper alternative for achieving the same utility. The consumer substituted the higher-priced, premium decorations with this more cost-effective bundle. This shift in consumption toward the relatively cheaper good and away from the relatively more expensive good is the substitution effect, triggered by the change in the relative price of spooky decorations.

By opting for this less expensive decorative setup, the consumer effectively increased their real income, as the money saved can now be used elsewhere.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo was taken when I went to Buffet Xujiji with my mom recently. I’ve been really craving sashimi lately, but since it’s usually too expensive to satisfy my appetite, I went all in at the buffet today — I probably grabbed at least 50 slices of sashimi. Since my marginal cost was zero — eating one more plate didn’t cost me anything — I just kept going. But as I got fuller, my marginal utility started to decline, which perfectly illustrates the law of diminishing marginal utility.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo shows the riverside walkway near our campus, where my friends and I often take a walk after class. Two years ago, there was no path — only mud covered with weeds. It was renovated last semester and now attracts many nearby residents to take a stroll.

This walkway can be considered a public good, as it meets the criteria for one. A public good is both non-excludable and non-rivalrous, meaning that no individual can be prevented from using it, and one person’s use does not diminish the availability or benefit of the good to others. This walkway is a typical example. It’s impossible for my friends and me to stop others from walking on this path even if we wanted it all to ourselves; likewise, others cannot prevent us from enjoying it either. This illustrates the characteristic of non-excludability. As for non-rivalry, based on my experience, there are not so many people using it at the same time that it feels crowded or uncomfortable, so I would define it as a non-rivalrous good. However, it makes me wonder what would happen if this walkway became a tourist attraction and the local government wanted to maintain its beauty. How would the government raise funds, and from whom would it collect the money? If only nearby residents — those who use it most frequently — were required to pay, would that create a free-rider problem? On the other hand, if a user-pays system were adopted, people might be discouraged from visiting, leading to an inefficient use of resources. If the government directly allocated part of its budget to maintain the walkway, what potential problems might arise from that approach?

# data[].attributes.body
This is a photo of the platform at Taipei Zoo Station on the Wenhu MRT Line. It is also the closest MRT station to our school. The Wenhu Line is the earliest MRT line built in Taipei. In 1998, the line started to face financial losses, so the government decided to lower the ticket prices. In the end, this actually helped increase total revenue. You might wonder: If the price goes down, shouldn’t the losses become worse?

We can explain this using the idea of price elasticity of demand in economics.

When a price changes, whether revenue goes up or down depends on the elasticity of demand. If demand is close to unit elastic, lowering the price can increase total revenue. If the original price is in a situation where demand is elastic, then lowering the price will increase ridership enough to raise total revenue. But if demand is inelastic, lowering the price would make the revenue decrease even more.

So which type of elasticity did the MRT originally have? The answer is elastic demand.

Because the Taipei MRT is publicly operated, its prices are set by the government. The government tends to set prices a bit higher at first, which makes demand more elastic. This gives them room to lower prices later to increase revenue. So when the government lowered the ticket prices, demand moved closer to unit elasticity, and total revenue successfully increased.

# data[].attributes.body
A while ago, I attended the "Children's Carnival," co-organized by the "Diversity and Inclusivity, Wenshan Harmony" USR project team from National Chengchi University and the "Wenshan Children and Youth Platform." During this event, I discovered insights into individual economics related to "utility maximization." The large number of participants indicated that people were willing to spend time and money to attend, suggesting the event was highly effective for them. The diverse selection of booths, games, food, and markets allowed consumers to allocate their time and spending according to their personal preferences, thus maximizing their individual utility.

# data[].attributes.body
Because I needed to prepare for my Intermediate Accounting exam today, I took yesterday off from my part-time job. I believe this is a great example of an economic concept: opportunity cost.

By choosing to study, the opportunity cost I incurred was the $500 salary I forfeited. This also implies that, to me, the value of studying for Intermediate Accounting is greater than $500.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo was taken during our freshman camp, when we ordered a lot of pizza for dinner. From a microeconomics perspective, this situation shows several ideas we learned in class.

First, students love pizza, so the demand was definitely high. Everyone gets happiness (or utility) from eating it. However, the more slices you eat, the less extra happiness you get — this is called diminishing marginal utility. The first slice tastes amazing, but by the fourth slice, you’re probably already full.

Also, because we ordered so many pizzas at once, the average cost per person became lower. This is an example of economies of scale — buying in a big group is cheaper than each person buying their own meal separately.

So the camp leaders made a rational decision: a food choice that most people enjoy, and at a lower cost. In the end, the pizzas didn’t just fill stomachs — they also created a fun dinner time that increased everyone’s overall utility.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo shows a course at NCCU during the first week of the semester. Some students were hoping the professor could manually add them to the course because they were not lucky enough to get into this class by the online course selection system. Based on the limited number of seats in the classroom, the professor decided to add only twenty additional students to this course, even though more than a hundred wanted to enroll.

In this situation, more than a hundred students wanted to enroll in the course, showing a high demand for available spots. However, the professor was only willing to add twenty more students because of the scarcity of teaching resources. As a result, there was excess demand — the number of students who wanted to join was greater than the number of seats available.

# data[].attributes.body
Last week, FamilyMart launched a dessert promotion, offering two desserts at a 31% discount. I had really wanted to try this dessert, but during the first few days of the promotion, I couldn’t find any stores that still had it in stock—probably because it was so popular. It wasn’t until the last day of the promotion that I finally found a store that had some left, so I decided to buy four at once.

This situation reflects several microeconomic concepts:

1. Market Equilibrium: Leading up to the last day of the promotional period, there was high demand for these donuts due to the 31% discount, resulting in frequent stockouts. The earlier shortage shows that, at the discounted price, quantity demanded exceeded quantity supplied, temporarily pushing the market away from equilibrium, causing shortages.

2. Consumer Behavior and Utility Maximization: Knowing the discount was ending and supply had been limited, the decision to buy four at once reflects rational consumer behavior—trying to maximize total utility given budget constraints. I bought four desserts instead of one or two because the discount increased my marginal utility per dollar spent. I was trying to maximize satisfaction (utility) within my budget.

3. Scarcity and Timing: Because the donuts were often out of stock during the promotion, the opportunity to buy them at a reduced price was scarce. I waited until the very last day of the promotion to take advantage of the deal, demonstrating how scarcity and deadlines influence consumption decisions.

4. Price Elasticity: The strong response to a discount (increased quantity demanded) suggests the donuts are relatively price elastic—consumers are sensitive to price changes for this product.

This experience makes me think of some questions below:

1. Could FamilyMart optimize inventory management further during promotional periods to avoid frequent shortages, thus increasing total sales and consumer satisfaction?

2. If discounts were applied more regularly, would the same demand surge occur, or would shoppers become less responsive over time?

# data[].attributes.body
This photo shows my idol’s new album configuration.

Normally, before an idol’s comeback, fans will pre-order the new album to help boost sales. During this period, most fans spend their money on the new album, so they usually have less money to spare. As a result, many fans choose to sell some of their other merchandise—such as photo cards, dolls, or older albums—to get extra cash. This increases the supply of idol merch on the market, which leads to lower prices.

That’s when I usually take the opportunity to buy the items I’ve been keeping an eye on, so I can get them at a cheaper price.

# data[].attributes.body
This picture shows the entrance of NCCU’s library and the parking area around it.

The school uses an automatic license plate recognition system to manage both the car parking and the scooter parking.

Even though this is a public school, the parking here is not free.

Cars that park longer than 30 minutes need to pay a fee, and scooters also have designated paid parking spaces. Delivery vehicles also have time limits.

From an economics perspective, this is a real-life example of how the school uses pricing to manage resources. Parking lots are limited spaces, and if they were free, many people would come and take spots even if they are not students or just want to visit nearby places. That would create congestion and make it difficult for actual students or faculty to find space.

# data[].attributes.body
Recently, I bought a simple black handbag that I can use every day. It’s not from any famous brand, but it’s stylish, practical, and goes well with most of my clothes. From an economic perspective, this decision shows the concept of opportunity cost. Instead of buying a more expensive designer bag, I chose this one because it gave me similar satisfaction for a lower price, the happiness I gained is my benefit, and the fancy label I gave up is my cost.

To make it feel more personal, I added a Nagano keychain. From an economic perspective, this purchase can be explained by the concept of marginal utility, the additional satisfaction gained from consuming one more unit of a good or service. Even though I already owned several keychains, adding this one increased my happiness because it made my bag feel more personal and unique. However, if I continued buying more similar plushies, my marginal utility from each new one would gradually decrease a phenomenon known as diminishing marginal utility. This shows how consumers make purchasing decisions not only based on price but also on how much extra satisfaction each additional good provides.

# data[].attributes.body
I took this photograph a few mornings ago while jogging along the riverbank, stopping near the Maokong Gondola station, which is in close geographical proximity to NCCU. The Taipei Zoo MRT station is conveniently located just a 300-meter walk away.

Tourists visiting this area have several options: they can explore the zoo to observe diverse and rare animals or take the gondola to enjoy the mountain scenery from an aerial perspective. The area consistently experiences high visitor volume on weekends, as these diverse options attract people seeking recreation.

The establishment of the MRT station provides a key resource: foot traffic, that is essentially a non-excludable benefit freely shared by the gondola operator and surrounding businesses. The transit connectivity afforded by the MRT station gives the gondola company access to a broader market base, effectively reducing the cost of customer acquisition it would otherwise incur. This constitutes a significant positive externality conferred by the MRT system on the gondola's operations.

The geographic proximity of the two facilities reinforces their complementarity as services. It efficiently integrates what were originally two independent services—urban transit (MRT) and tourism connectivity (Gondola)—allowing passengers to consume them as a single, cohesive composite good. The (actual) existence of tourists who choose this itinerary specifically for the ease of transfer demonstrates that they derive a higher level of total utility from the combined offering. Thus, the near-site location of the MRT and gondola stations not only expands the potential market but also serves to maximize the social welfare derived from this public infrastructure.

# data[].attributes.body
My hometown baseball team Rakuten Monkeys has won the championship in CPBL last week. Then, they decided to hold a parade around Taoyuan city. From economic perspective, the event generated a temporary increase in local demand for food, transportation and merchandise. Vendors and nearby businesses experienced higher sales volumes, reflecting a positive short-term demand shock.

At the same time, there were opportunity costs and negative externalities. City government would use additional budget for security, cleanup, and public transportation management. While these expenditures stimulate local employment temporarily, they represent resources diverted from other public projects. The traffic and business disruption during the parade may also impose efficiency losses on every citizens.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo shows two fruit juice packs I bought from a convenience store. Normally, one costs NT$79, but the store had a promotion — two for NT$99. I originally only wanted one, but because of the deal, I decided to buy two instead. It felt like a better value even though I ended up spending more.

This situation shows how pricing strategy can shape consumer behavior. The store used bundle pricing to make people feel they’re saving money, which increases sales. It also connects to the idea of marginal benefit — the extra satisfaction from the second drink felt worth it compared to the small additional cost.

It also reflects opportunity cost, since buying more of one product means giving up the chance to spend that money elsewhere. Still, the sense of getting a “good deal” influenced my decision.

It made me realize how easily our choices are affected by marketing and pricing strategies. Even a simple discount can make us feel smarter as consumers, while we might actually be spending more.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo shows two fruit juice packs I bought from a convenience store. Normally, one costs NT$79, but the store had a promotion — two for NT$99. I originally only wanted one, but because of the deal, I decided to buy two instead. It felt like a better value even though I ended up spending more.

This situation shows how pricing strategy can shape consumer behavior. The store used bundle pricing to make people feel they’re saving money, which increases sales. It also connects to the idea of marginal benefit — the extra satisfaction from the second drink felt worth it compared to the small additional cost.

It also reflects opportunity cost, since buying more of one product means giving up the chance to spend that money elsewhere. Still, the sense of getting a “good deal” influenced my decision.

It made me realize how easily our choices are affected by marketing and pricing strategies. Even a simple discount can make us feel smarter as consumers, while we might actually be spending more.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo was taken when I visited Disneyland last month .It features a special character-shaped popsicle that can only be found in Disneyland.

When purchasing the park ticket, there was an optional meal voucher add-on for HK$120, which included a meal (lunch or dinner) and a “free” Disney popsicle. At first glance, the deal seemed attractive. However, I had no intention of eating a meal inside Disneyland. I was only interested in the popsicle itself.If I had chosen the meal voucher, I would have spent HK$120 but only gained utility from the popsicle, not from the meal. Therefore, I decided not to buy the voucher and instead purchased the popsicle alone for HK$45. This seemingly simple decision reflects some important principle of individual economics.

Rational choice theory suggests that consumers make decisions to maximize their total utility under a budget constraint.
In this case, I faced two options:pay HK$120 for the meal voucher (including a popsicle), or pay HK$45 for just the popsicle.Since I did not value the meal, the utility I would gain from the extra HK$75 (HK$120-HK$45) spent was nearly zero. Buying the voucher would have meant paying more for no additional satisfaction. Therefore, choosing to buy only the popsicle provided a higher utility-to-cost ratio — a rational decision that maximized my personal benefit.Consumers do not simply choose the cheapest or most inclusive deal; instead, they evaluate how much satisfaction each option brings relative to its cost.

# data[].attributes.body
This photo captures a tandem skydive I took over the Great Ocean Road this summer. Beyond the visceral thrill, the experience is an excellent case study in applied microeconomics: how consumers evaluate risky, scarce, and experience-based goods; how suppliers price and manage capacity under uncertainty; and how information and preferences shape market outcomes.

From the consumer side, the decision to skydive is primarily governed by willingness to pay (WTP) and subjective utility. Unlike standard commodities, the good here is an experience — its value arises from non-material benefits (memories, status, intense emotions). You explicitly paid about NT$13,000 for the jump; because you judged the first jump “worth it,” your consumer surplus is positive: the utility you gained exceeded the price paid. The report that you briefly felt unwell after the 60 seconds free fall also illustrates marginal utility and diminishing returns: the first jump yields very high marginal utility (novelty and intensity), while the second jump typically provides a smaller incremental gain—consistent with diminishing marginal utility for repeated experiential consumption.

Risk matters. Providers charge a risk premium above what similar-duration, lower-risk leisure activities command to compensate for liability, safety equipment, and skilled labor (tandem instructors). The market thus bundles a safety premium with the experience price. Closely related is information asymmetry and trust: consumers cannot fully verify a company’s safety practices prior to purchase, so reputable operators use signaling (licenses, instructor certifications, online reviews) to credibly differentiate themselves. That you needed to wait for weather checks and boarding conditions highlights stochastic supply—supply is contingent on exogenous conditions (weather), making capacity uncertain and complicating scheduling and pricing.

Scarcity and capacity constraints shape market structure. There are relatively few certified tandem instructors and limited aircraft time; these supply-side constraints create scarcity and justify higher prices during peak seasons. Firms may practice price discrimination (e.g., off-peak discounts, group rates, or seasonal pricing) to extract more surplus from heterogeneous consumers with different price sensitivities.

Behavioral economics also explains choices here. Prospect theory and the affect heuristic predict that anticipated emotions (fear, excitement) strongly influence WTP, and that losses (safety incidents) are weighted more heavily than equivalent gains. Social preferences and signaling contribute too — extreme experiences can function as status goods, increasing utility through social recognition.

Finally, if we frame the consumer’s problem under budget and time constraints, the chosen allocation (one expensive high-risk experience versus several lower-cost leisure activities) reflects utility maximization given budget and time constraints. Your willingness to potentially repeat the experience, despite some discomfort, suggests the net present value of the experiential utility, even accounting for short-term costs (nausea), remains positive for you.

Conclusion: Skydiving illustrates multiple microeconomic themes at once: consumer preference for memorable experiences, risk pricing and premiums, scarcity and capacity-driven pricing, information asymmetry and signaling, behavioral drivers of WTP, and welfare/regulatory implications. This tandem jump exemplifies how real-world markets for high-risk experiences allocate resources and extract surplus — and why such activities can command premium prices despite their non-pecuniary costs.

# data[].attributes.body
This weight machine perfectly illustrates the economic principle of Diminishing Marginal Utility.

Initially, when a person begins exercising or increases their training intensity from a lower base (e.g., adding the first few plates of weight or performing the first few sets), the additional benefit (marginal utility) they gain in terms of muscle growth, strength, or satisfaction is significant.

However, as they continue to invest more effort, time, or weight (i.e., making additional "inputs"), the marginal utility from each subsequent additional input gradually decreases. For an experienced lifter, achieving even a small increment of progress (e.g., gaining 1 kg of muscle or increasing a lift by 5 kg) requires a disproportionately larger amount of effort and training volume compared to a beginner.

Eventually, the marginal benefit derived from further training (e.g., adding another set or increasing weight) can become so small that it no longer justifies the opportunity cost (the value of alternative activities they could be doing) or the potential for injury. At this point, a rational "economic agent" (the gym-goer) would consider altering their routine, resting, or stopping the exercise.