Comments on: The Peculiar Economics of Children’s Entertainment http://techliberation.com/2006/10/31/the-peculiar-economics-of-childrens-entertainment/ Keeping politicians' hands off the Net & everything else related to technology Tue, 14 Feb 2012 12:51:08 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: enigma_foundry http://techliberation.com/2006/10/31/the-peculiar-economics-of-childrens-entertainment/comment-page-1/#comment-35753 enigma_foundry Tue, 31 Oct 2006 17:48:29 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/10/31/the-peculiar-economics-of-childrens-entertainment/#comment-35753 <p>Well, my son is a bit older (8 years old) and I became quite familar with the island of sodor and also Bob the builder, but the commintariansim never grated on me because there was so much corporate propaganda in advertising, that breeds selfishness, that I never worried about 'too much communitarianism" Of course, we watch very little TV, prefering to rent videos from the library, never having to pay for them or listen to commercials, outweighed the issue of limited selection.</p> <p>Now, an interesting phenomena was my son for a very long time insisted that Charles, the local librarian owned the library, and persisted in using the term 'buy' when he wanted a book, not fully getting it that this wasn't borders, so we didn't have to buy anything.</p> <p>Many of the Thomas stories do contain economic references, BTW, in particular one in which a school is being closed down, and a fair is organzed by Sir Topham Hat to save the school.</p> <p>Which brings up an item I'd noticed in Amartya Sen's book, Development as Freedom (an extremely good book by the way), in which he noted how Adam Smith backed public education.</p> <p>In the same book Sen discuss the distribution of income within a family, and discusses how that can be measured, in particular by the 'missing women' in certain cultures, for example China.</p> <p>Another interesting point Sen made was the very strong linkage between female literacy and the survival of children. There was a weaker link between male literacy and the survival of children, BTW.</p> Well, my son is a bit older (8 years old) and I became quite familar with the island of sodor and also Bob the builder, but the commintariansim never grated on me because there was so much corporate propaganda in advertising, that breeds selfishness, that I never worried about ‘too much communitarianism” Of course, we watch very little TV, prefering to rent videos from the library, never having to pay for them or listen to commercials, outweighed the issue of limited selection.

Now, an interesting phenomena was my son for a very long time insisted that Charles, the local librarian owned the library, and persisted in using the term ‘buy’ when he wanted a book, not fully getting it that this wasn’t borders, so we didn’t have to buy anything.

Many of the Thomas stories do contain economic references, BTW, in particular one in which a school is being closed down, and a fair is organzed by Sir Topham Hat to save the school.

Which brings up an item I’d noticed in Amartya Sen’s book, Development as Freedom (an extremely good book by the way), in which he noted how Adam Smith backed public education.

In the same book Sen discuss the distribution of income within a family, and discusses how that can be measured, in particular by the ‘missing women’ in certain cultures, for example China.

Another interesting point Sen made was the very strong linkage between female literacy and the survival of children. There was a weaker link between male literacy and the survival of children, BTW.

]]> By: eee_eff http://techliberation.com/2006/10/31/the-peculiar-economics-of-childrens-entertainment/comment-page-1/#comment-45936 eee_eff Tue, 31 Oct 2006 17:48:29 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/10/31/the-peculiar-economics-of-childrens-entertainment/#comment-45936 <p>Well, my son is a bit older (8 years old) and I became quite familar with the island of sodor and also Bob the builder, but the commintariansim never grated on me because there was so much corporate propaganda in advertising, that breeds selfishness, that I never worried about 'too much communitarianism" Of course, we watch very little TV, prefering to rent videos from the library, never having to pay for them or listen to commercials, outweighed the issue of limited selection.<br><br>Now, an interesting phenomena was my son for a very long time insisted that Charles, the local librarian owned the library, and persisted in using the term 'buy' when he wanted a book, not fully getting it that this wasn't borders, so we didn't have to buy anything.<br><br>Many of the Thomas stories do contain economic references, BTW, in particular one in which a school is being closed down, and a fair is organzed by Sir Topham Hat to save the school.<br><br>Which brings up an item I'd noticed in Amartya Sen's book, Development as Freedom (an extremely good book by the way), in which he noted how Adam Smith backed public education.<br><br>In the same book Sen discuss the distribution of income within a family, and discusses how that can be measured, in particular by the 'missing women' in certain cultures, for example China.<br><br>Another interesting point Sen made was the very strong linkage between female literacy and the survival of children. There was a weaker link between male literacy and the survival of children, BTW.</p> Well, my son is a bit older (8 years old) and I became quite familar with the island of sodor and also Bob the builder, but the commintariansim never grated on me because there was so much corporate propaganda in advertising, that breeds selfishness, that I never worried about ‘too much communitarianism” Of course, we watch very little TV, prefering to rent videos from the library, never having to pay for them or listen to commercials, outweighed the issue of limited selection.

Now, an interesting phenomena was my son for a very long time insisted that Charles, the local librarian owned the library, and persisted in using the term ‘buy’ when he wanted a book, not fully getting it that this wasn’t borders, so we didn’t have to buy anything.

Many of the Thomas stories do contain economic references, BTW, in particular one in which a school is being closed down, and a fair is organzed by Sir Topham Hat to save the school.

Which brings up an item I’d noticed in Amartya Sen’s book, Development as Freedom (an extremely good book by the way), in which he noted how Adam Smith backed public education.

In the same book Sen discuss the distribution of income within a family, and discusses how that can be measured, in particular by the ‘missing women’ in certain cultures, for example China.

Another interesting point Sen made was the very strong linkage between female literacy and the survival of children. There was a weaker link between male literacy and the survival of children, BTW.

]]> By: Don Marti http://techliberation.com/2006/10/31/the-peculiar-economics-of-childrens-entertainment/comment-page-1/#comment-35752 Don Marti Tue, 31 Oct 2006 16:11:37 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/10/31/the-peculiar-economics-of-childrens-entertainment/#comment-35752 <p>Legos don't share easily, since there are many different kinds, and you're more likely to want all of a given kind (both long red plates and both single wheels for matching wings and landing gear on an airplane) than "your share" which includes one long red plate, one squarish blue plate, and several non-matching wheels.</p> <p>So when you tell kids to "share" Legos, you're really telling them to invent a system for allocating Legos -- picking, trading, taking turns, divide-and-choose -- whatever works well enough for everyone that nobody will complain loud enough to draw an "if you can't all be polite and share we're going to put the Legos away."</p> <p>The sum of toy allocation time and play time is fixed, so kids have an incentive to simplify the "sharing" system to a set of quick conventions, just as software development organizations have an incentive to cut transaction costs by using a few standard licenses.</p> Legos don’t share easily, since there are many different kinds, and you’re more likely to want all of a given kind (both long red plates and both single wheels for matching wings and landing gear on an airplane) than “your share” which includes one long red plate, one squarish blue plate, and several non-matching wheels.

So when you tell kids to “share” Legos, you’re really telling them to invent a system for allocating Legos — picking, trading, taking turns, divide-and-choose — whatever works well enough for everyone that nobody will complain loud enough to draw an “if you can’t all be polite and share we’re going to put the Legos away.”

The sum of toy allocation time and play time is fixed, so kids have an incentive to simplify the “sharing” system to a set of quick conventions, just as software development organizations have an incentive to cut transaction costs by using a few standard licenses.

]]> By: Don Marti http://techliberation.com/2006/10/31/the-peculiar-economics-of-childrens-entertainment/comment-page-1/#comment-45935 Don Marti Tue, 31 Oct 2006 16:11:37 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/10/31/the-peculiar-economics-of-childrens-entertainment/#comment-45935 <p>Legos don't share easily, since there are many different kinds, and you're more likely to want all of a given kind (both long red plates and both single wheels for matching wings and landing gear on an airplane) than "your share" which includes one long red plate, one squarish blue plate, and several non-matching wheels.<br><br>So when you tell kids to "share" Legos, you're really telling them to invent a system for allocating Legos -- picking, trading, taking turns, divide-and-choose -- whatever works well enough for everyone that nobody will complain loud enough to draw an "if you can't all be polite and share we're going to put the Legos away."<br><br>The sum of toy allocation time and play time is fixed, so kids have an incentive to simplify the "sharing" system to a set of quick conventions, just as software development organizations have an incentive to cut transaction costs by using a few standard licenses.</p> Legos don’t share easily, since there are many different kinds, and you’re more likely to want all of a given kind (both long red plates and both single wheels for matching wings and landing gear on an airplane) than “your share” which includes one long red plate, one squarish blue plate, and several non-matching wheels.

So when you tell kids to “share” Legos, you’re really telling them to invent a system for allocating Legos — picking, trading, taking turns, divide-and-choose — whatever works well enough for everyone that nobody will complain loud enough to draw an “if you can’t all be polite and share we’re going to put the Legos away.”

The sum of toy allocation time and play time is fixed, so kids have an incentive to simplify the “sharing” system to a set of quick conventions, just as software development organizations have an incentive to cut transaction costs by using a few standard licenses.

]]> By: greglas http://techliberation.com/2006/10/31/the-peculiar-economics-of-childrens-entertainment/comment-page-1/#comment-35751 greglas Tue, 31 Oct 2006 15:34:10 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/10/31/the-peculiar-economics-of-childrens-entertainment/#comment-35751 <p>Yes, I'd call "turns" a temporary usufruct -- I think Lord Blackstone would approve.</p> <p>But more importantly, while I think I disagree with you about the benefits of not promoting sharing, I <em>really</em> have to take my hat off to you for doing a close reading of the socio-economic system represented in Bob the Builder -- I too have been immersed in Bob's world (though we're moving on now). One of my constant questions was about his relationship to Wendy and their division of labor. I assumed Dizzy, Muck, and the others were "pets," mature, part of the family, but essentially dependent beings. :-)</p> Yes, I’d call “turns” a temporary usufruct — I think Lord Blackstone would approve.

But more importantly, while I think I disagree with you about the benefits of not promoting sharing, I really have to take my hat off to you for doing a close reading of the socio-economic system represented in Bob the Builder — I too have been immersed in Bob’s world (though we’re moving on now). One of my constant questions was about his relationship to Wendy and their division of labor. I assumed Dizzy, Muck, and the others were “pets,” mature, part of the family, but essentially dependent beings. :-)

]]> By: greglas http://techliberation.com/2006/10/31/the-peculiar-economics-of-childrens-entertainment/comment-page-1/#comment-45934 greglas Tue, 31 Oct 2006 15:34:10 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/10/31/the-peculiar-economics-of-childrens-entertainment/#comment-45934 <p>Yes, I'd call "turns" a temporary usufruct -- I think Lord Blackstone would approve.<br><br>But more importantly, while I think I disagree with you about the benefits of not promoting sharing, I <em>really</em> have to take my hat off to you for doing a close reading of the socio-economic system represented in Bob the Builder -- I too have been immersed in Bob's world (though we're moving on now). One of my constant questions was about his relationship to Wendy and their division of labor. I assumed Dizzy, Muck, and the others were "pets," mature, part of the family, but essentially dependent beings. :-)</p> Yes, I’d call “turns” a temporary usufruct — I think Lord Blackstone would approve.

But more importantly, while I think I disagree with you about the benefits of not promoting sharing, I really have to take my hat off to you for doing a close reading of the socio-economic system represented in Bob the Builder — I too have been immersed in Bob’s world (though we’re moving on now). One of my constant questions was about his relationship to Wendy and their division of labor. I assumed Dizzy, Muck, and the others were “pets,” mature, part of the family, but essentially dependent beings. :-)

]]> By: James Gattuso http://techliberation.com/2006/10/31/the-peculiar-economics-of-childrens-entertainment/comment-page-1/#comment-35750 James Gattuso Tue, 31 Oct 2006 14:27:54 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/10/31/the-peculiar-economics-of-childrens-entertainment/#comment-35750 <p>Solveig -- I don't know if Thomas or his friends get paid, but they were nationalized in 1947 ("We are nationalized now, but the same engines work the region," Rev. Awdry wrote in a Sodor book that came out that year.) I'm not sure when they were privatized again (perhaps Thatcher had a children's fictional privatization program), but Sir Topham Hatt seems to be safely making profits once again.</p> <p>I know way too much about this, I know. Can you tell I have a five-year old at home?</p> Solveig — I don’t know if Thomas or his friends get paid, but they were nationalized in 1947 (“We are nationalized now, but the same engines work the region,” Rev. Awdry wrote in a Sodor book that came out that year.) I’m not sure when they were privatized again (perhaps Thatcher had a children’s fictional privatization program), but Sir Topham Hatt seems to be safely making profits once again.

I know way too much about this, I know. Can you tell I have a five-year old at home?

]]> By: James Gattuso http://techliberation.com/2006/10/31/the-peculiar-economics-of-childrens-entertainment/comment-page-1/#comment-45933 James Gattuso Tue, 31 Oct 2006 14:27:54 +0000 http://techliberation.com/2006/10/31/the-peculiar-economics-of-childrens-entertainment/#comment-45933 <p>Solveig -- I don't know if Thomas or his friends get paid, but they were nationalized in 1947 ("We are nationalized now, but the same engines work the region," Rev. Awdry wrote in a Sodor book that came out that year.) I'm not sure when they were privatized again (perhaps Thatcher had a children's fictional privatization program), but Sir Topham Hatt seems to be safely making profits once again.<br><br>I know way too much about this, I know. Can you tell I have a five-year old at home?</p> Solveig — I don’t know if Thomas or his friends get paid, but they were nationalized in 1947 (“We are nationalized now, but the same engines work the region,” Rev. Awdry wrote in a Sodor book that came out that year.) I’m not sure when they were privatized again (perhaps Thatcher had a children’s fictional privatization program), but Sir Topham Hatt seems to be safely making profits once again.

I know way too much about this, I know. Can you tell I have a five-year old at home?

]]>