Hawaii Comes in Last Again

[Old Croc]

It means in Hawaii you will pay $100 to buy what folks on the Mainland will pay $84.46 for at the national average price level. In other words, $100 is worth the least in Hawaii among all 50 states and the District of Corruption.

[TomK]

Old Croc - I understood your post perfectly well. I didn't understand the comment glassnumbers made, the one I quoted.

[rainyjim]

Tom, he/she was implying economics of Hawaii shipping doesn’t make sense compared to a basic economic principle.

The reason it doesn’t apply so well to Hawaii is because most of the goods that are shipped here are not produced here and won’t ever be so there is always high demand and always low supply, which means the goods value does not change based on demand because the demand is constant. Therefore the base claim is a finite value - absolute demand.

If you (read:anyone) took a basic economics class but had no knowledge of Hawaii’s economics or US shipping policies then it would indeed make no sense as glassnumbers asserts.

[Rob Tucker]

I think that this, as relates to cost of shipping goods, is not correct. As a commodity in shipment the value of the goods does not change in relation to demand as relates to the direct cost of shipment. The value of the goods is determined by their purchase price when bought and loaded into a container. That purchase price is calculated into the insurance value of the commodity in the container.

[kalakoa]

Cost, price, value, overhead: often related, but all different parts of the puzzle.

Hawaii has more overhead, so prices are higher to recoup that cost. The intrinsic value of the goods is constant.

[punaticbychoice]

kalakoa @09:06:14 08/28/2018-
Exactly.
Our disadvantage very cogently expressed.

[TomK]

All - thanks for explaining glassnumber's comment. I'll think I'll get back to astrophysics. My mind just can't handle economics theory...

[kalakoa]

My mind just can't handle economics theory...

The problem with economics is that it involves irrational players (humans). Hard sciences are much more straightforward.

Example (off-topic, yet so very on-topic) from today's paper:

http://www.westhawaiitoday.com/2018/08/2...-question/

DWS signed a PPA to get cheaper electricity (their largest cost) from a renewable non-HELCO source. It appears DWS would rather keep buying expensive HELCO power, thereby driving the wind farm out of business. We pay higher prices for water; we probably get to pay for the lawsuit against DWS. How does this make economic sense?

[punaticbychoice]

TomK @ 00:25:42 08/29/2018-
Couldn't help remembering George HW Bush's comment about
"voodoo economics".
Yes, the dismal "science" indeed.

[TomK]

"DWS signed a PPA to get cheaper electricity (their largest cost) from a renewable non-HELCO source. It appears DWS would rather keep buying expensive HELCO power, thereby driving the wind farm out of business."

This is why I always try to go to the source. Those two sentences above are so contradictory you know you have to go somewhere else to unravel them.