Slate reports that on this day of romance and love up to 45 million pounds of chocolate will be given from men to women. But why did women come to be associated with chocolate? Slate took a look at the history of chocolate and gender:

• Studies analyzing whether or not women objectively enjoy chocolate more than men have been inconclusive. They have however suggested that American women enjoy chocolate more than women outside of America which would indicate that cultural factors are at play.
• Effective marketing is the most likely reason for the link between women and chocolate. Marketers do this by either suggesting that a woman’s life remains unfulfilled unless they are given chocolate, or they portray chocolate and sexuality as a transactional arrangement between men and women.
• Advertizers might have chosen to market chocolate in this way due to the increasing liberalization of women. Chocolate was a demonstration that women didn’t need a man to take care of them since chocolate fulfilled their every need. Unlike alcohol or sex chocolate is seen as a culturally appropriate thing for women to indulge in. Conversely, chocolate companies began selling men on the idea that sexuality could be bought with chocolate.
• There is a historical precedent for the relationship between chocolate and sex. The Aztecs believed that it enhanced the virility of men.

To read more about chocolate and women through the years; to find out why men drank coffee while women drank chocolate; and to see examples of advertizers linking chocolate with sexuality, click here.

Source: Slate

Fosslien has posted Valentine’s Day cards that draw upon the principles of Economics. They include such glorious prose as:

• “I think you’re fantastic, for what you’re supplying, my demand’s inelastic.”
• “I shorted the market and went long on you”
• “Love is so foolish, but I could care less, if you’re stock then I’m bullish”

To read more of the charming poetry as well as the beautifully elegant and simple cards that accompany them, click here.

Source: Fosslien

Via: Marginal Revolution

The Economist recently took a look at employee benefits and noted that:

• Part of the reason why wages in America have stagnated is that employers have increasingly incorporated lucrative benefits as part of an employee’s compensation package.
• The biggest benefits relate to health care. As life expectancy increases and the cost of health care rises, a commitment by the employer to provide health care is worth a lot.
• However, unlike pensions which have increasingly become potable, health benefits do not transfer from one employer to another. This discourages employees from switching their jobs which is a problem because job mobility has become increasingly important in today’s economy.
• Statistics show that if not for employer health benefits job turnover rates would be 25% higher. The current state of affairs also discourages self-employment and entrepreneurship.

To read more about why job mobility is important in today’s economy, as well as the historical developments behind this phenomenon, click here.

Source: The Economist

• The difficulty of ‘winning’ in a claw game varies by machine. Manufacturers can adjust several variables to make the game either more or less difficult. They include: changing the length of time allowed for each attempt, changing the strength of the claw’s grip, cramming together the prizes so they are more difficult to pull out, or making it so that the claws only keep hold of the prize every X attempts.
• Claw machine operators generally aim to award $3 in prizes for every $10 spent.
• The best way to ensure success is to watch others play to better understand the idiosyncrasies of the machine. Then, when you’re ready to begin, have a friend stand beside the machine so that they can help you better gauge depth.

To read more about the laws relating to claw machines (you can call them “claws”), and the more colourful name that Europeans give to the devices click here.

Source: Slate

RIM’s failures in the smartphone market have largely occurred because of the consumerization of IT. The New Yorker recently took a look at why this has happened and what it means:

• R.I.M.’s devices became popular because of their appeal to corporate IT departments. Blackberry phones offered reliability and security that corporations could easily control.
• This made a lot of sense because the demand for a lot of the most advanced technology has been driven by corporations over the years. Examples include: telephones, the internet, and personal computers.
• The trend over the last decade however has been the consumerization of IT. Employees bring in the technology they prefer to use and businesses adapt to suit them.
• Corporations have allowed for this trend partly because it means that employees stay connected with their workplace for longer periods including weekends. It also reduces costs since employers no longer have to provide the technology.

To read more about RIM’s failings as well as some other technologies that were adapted by consumers rather than businesses, click here.

Source: The New Yorker

Via: The Economist

The New York Times reports that passengers are coming up with creative techniques to avoid check baggage fees imposed by the airlines. They include:

• Travelling hundreds of miles to find airports serviced by Southwest Airlines or JetBlue – two airlines that don’t charge for the first checked bag.
• Others have taken up using airline branded credit cards which give them a host of perks but require high annual fees.
• An entire category of clothes with large pockets and plenty of storage room has become popular. Travelers are able to store a fair amount of things in clothing such as trench coats.
• Some passengers have resorted to vacuum sealing their packages – something that can significantly shrink the size of packages. They better hope that security doesn’t try to open them up though.

To read about some of the other techniques that passengers might use, as well as what Congress is doing to make things easier for passengers click here.

Source: The New York Times

Via: Cheap Talk

What would a world without Football look like? It’s not just idle speculation – it’s a very real possibility according to Tyler Cowen and Kevin Grier in an article they write for Grantland. Highlights include:

• Popular sports disappear all the time. Baseball, boxing and horse racing were the most popular sports less than a century ago. Now only baseball maintains the same kind of following.
• One scenario that leads to the end of football involves lawsuits over player injuries sustained during play. Insurance companies would refuse to insure players and coaches if this became a common phenomenon. Coaches and referees would become worried about potential liability issues and might choose not to be involved. Parents might withdraw their kids from the team. First the players would leave, then the viewers, and then, finally, the advertizers.
• While the direct economic impact is small – the NFL generates about $10 billion in revenue a year, compared to a national GDP of $15,300 billion – there will be several knock-on effects. Big stadiums would lose value as will industries such as accommodation and food preparation that rely on the audiences the stadiums draw. Since a lot of these stadiums are in rural America, urbanization might increase.
• Human capital would rise. Students would have less distracting them, and people who would’ve become players will turn into doctors and engineers instead. Schools would have to compete on academics rather than sports, causing educational levels to rise.

To see why basketball and football players from third world countries would benefit the most, as well as what sports will administrators do, and other interesting tidbits in a very well written and easily comprehensible article, click here.

Source: Grantland

Via: Marginal Revolution

Mike Mandel was asked to figure out how many jobs were available in today’s “App-Economy” his findings include:

• Official statistics from the government were unhelpful because the App Economy is dynamic and ever-evolving.
• Using his own measure, Mandel estimates that there are now over 450,000 App jobs in the United States. This started from 0 in 2007.
• Mandel argues that since the App Economy added a significant amount of jobs during a recession, it is likely that it is an industry that will boom even faster as the economy recovers.

To read more about what this could mean going into the future, as well as what governments could do to take advantage of this, click here.

Source: Mandel on Innovation and Growth

Via: The Economist