An Educative Experience: Grade 12 Economics Field Trip to the Fraser Institute

By Jackson Cowie (‘20)

On Friday, October 26, Greenwood’s Economics class bussed to the Fraser Institute at 3450 Dufferin Street to partake in an economics seminar. The goal of the seminar was to broaden our understanding of concepts already learned and to explore new principles of economics.

The seminar was directed by two experts in the field of Economics. The first, Debbie Henney, is the Director of Curriculum at the foundation for Teaching Economics. The second was Ninos Malek, who is a professor at De Anza College. Throughout the seminar, they explained the basic nature of economics and how it is present in everyday life.

During the first half of the seminar, Ninos and Debbie explained some principal economic concepts. Most notably, they emphasized that there is a big difference between price and cost. Ninos made it clear that everything indeed has a cost, but not everything has a price. This concept relates to opportunity cost, in that one must always forego something when making a decision. “There is no such thing as a free lunch,” is a popular phrase used to describe this theory. They demonstrated this concept through an activity in which student volunteers were asked to choose one chocolate bar out of an assortment. The students were then asked what their opportunity cost was. With some help, a consensus was formed by the students that the next best chocolate bar option (or not having one at all) was the opportunity cost.

Shortly after, a new and interesting concept was introduced. More volunteers were asked to the stage, including one from Greenwood. The volunteers were asked to eat as many Kit-Kats as they could, and rank their utility, or marginal benefit from eating them from a one to ten. As the students continued eating, their marginal benefit slowly but surely decreased to a point where they didn’t want any more Kit-Kats. This activity demonstrated the law of diminishing marginal benefit. This law of economics proves that there can be too much of a good thing, and infinite consumption of one good is not ideal for people.

Another interesting concept that Ninos and Debbie introduced was the tragedy of the commons. This theory compares public and private ownership and the responsibility associated with both. For example, there has been a sea of trash accumulating in the North Pacific Ocean for decades, yet nobody has done anything to effectively clean it up. This theory would support the claim that this is happening because nobody owns it, so no country feels a responsibility to clean it up. On the contrary, when assets are privately owned, owners feel a responsibility to keep their things clean, organized and professional.

Overall, the seminar was very enjoyable, and an excellent way of synthesizing the economic concepts we have learned so far. One particular piece that I sympathized with was the concept of a sunk cost. Once something is purchased, it is generally an irretrievable cost. As Ninos put it, “What’s done is done.” I am constantly trying to get my money’s worth without realizing what is truly best for me. For example, whenever I buy fast food, I almost immediately regret it and want my money back. I force myself to eat the entire meal because I spent the money. However, I learned that it is irrational to do this because the money I spent is irretrievable. The next time I am too full to finish an expensive dinner, or I feel remorse after buying expensive popcorn at the movies, I will be sure to remember Ninos’ words and make the best decision in the given moment.