data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f0bae/f0bae5d17c9a0759bc8a8c7c4ed854588c9a42f6" alt="Having an aha moment"
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/bdf97/bdf971c00eb9d6485208356079023289d6860815" alt="having an aha moment having an aha moment"
So if I put an item up for $500, they will actually list it at $525, and when it’s bought, the buyer pays $525, Swappa keeps $25, and I get $500. They accomplish this by adding their fee to the posted price when you list an item. But they also tell you, the seller, not to worry about that – the fee will be paid by the buyer, not the seller.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/71481/71481ac6e5eead66ce32731377a50601f40c8b8f" alt="having an aha moment having an aha moment"
Swappa, of course, makes a fee with every sale it facilitates. (Probably too many, but that’s a story for a separate post.) And when some new shiny toy has come out that I’ve decided I want, I would use Swappa to sell my current gadget to offset the cost of the new one. As an unabashed tech nerd, I’ve bought a ton of gadgets over the years. To see why, let’s consider a service I’ve used many times – an online sales platform called Swappa. The fact that the law says the wealthy will be stuck with the bill for a tax does not mean the wealthy are the ones who will truly pay the cost. And for those whose goal is improving the well-being of the poor by increasing taxes on the rich, understanding it is crucial. “The legal incidence of a tax is not the same as its economic incidence.” One important idea in economics that is, in my opinion, terribly described is this: But fiction isn’t the only avenue for that – we can find it in everyday life as well. When done well, it can help bring that “aha!” moment that makes an idea clear to someone in a way that charts, graphs, and technical verbiage simply can’t. This is one reason why I enjoy finding the ideas of economics clearly described or illustrated in works of fiction. To anyone other than an economist, the phrase “ public good” sounds like “good provided by the public sector.” Try to jump in and explain that, no, to be a public good, something needs to be both non-rival and non-excludable, and you’re likely to be met with glazed eyes. I say this with all the love in the world: economists have a special knack for taking certain economic ideas or concepts and finding the most counterintuitive or unclear ways of describing them.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f0bae/f0bae5d17c9a0759bc8a8c7c4ed854588c9a42f6" alt="Having an aha moment"