The "Contagion Effect" reminds me of supply chains in exports between countries. Because a country exports an intermediate good to another, if there is a disruption that effects the export of the country, the other ends up having disruptions in their distribution/production. This shows that when a country becomes a free financial market and starts working with other international markets, they need to be aware that any economic or even political issues within the other country could likely affect their economy.

This quote shows a domino effect, especially when discussing supply chains and recessions. A source I found that highlights the domino effect states, "The domino effect from disturbances is a common phenomenon in supply chains. The effects of which spread along the processes and supply chain links even in the case of companies regarded as mature in terms of managing supply chains." This shows that no matter how big a country or firm is in a global economic landscape, when places are opened up as free financial markets and start to rely on trade, one country ends up affecting another in either a positive or negative way.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/328747973_The_domino_effect_-_disruptions_in_supply_chains

Because of the promotion of free financial markets in less economically developed countries, the end result might be a marginalization of local workers. Because of such a large increase in foreign investment, the increased capital might decrease not only local investment, but also smaller local businesses. This shows that whilst a promoting free financial markets might be seen as a positive, foreign money might harm the country it's going to.

This quote shows that because of foreign investment in Indonesia as a result of it being a free international financial markets, smaller towns were able to increase their per capita income because of the increases infrastructure and quality of life that comes with foreign investment. All these accumulate to increase economic growth within Indonesia.

https://www.businessofapps.com/data/apple-statistics/ This is an article I found that introduced a source of questioning for me. The article stated that Apple experienced their largest first quarter to date in 2020 (amidst the start of the pandemic), this made me wonder how Apple managed to swerve the supply shocks and maintain growth especially as a technology company. Although, the article states that majority of their revenue came from iPhones, I would assume that the parts for the iPhone came from a similar area of the world as their computer parts.

I think that this statement relates to the concept of specialization and comparative advantage that we discussed in class, but instead of on a country to country scale, it pertains more for a firm to country scale. When reading this I couldn't really comprehend why a company as big as Apple would jeopardize the production of possibly all their goods in the case of a supply shock such as the one due to Covid 19. However, upon further consideration, I realised that the prices they are paying for their bulk order parts must be so low and the quantity so high that the incentive to produce or store their parts is not comparable to the profits they would make by ordering as they need.

This description of what happened to the fishing industry in Grand Banks is a good example of the resource curse. In an article by Bloomberg outlining the resource curse (https://www.bloomberg.com/quicktake/resource-curse), it states what seperates a successful and unsuccessful country that has an abundance of natural resources is the "amount of diversification in the economy and the strength of a country’s institutions."

I think that this statement aligns what we learned in class about the relationship between economic growth and pollution in the country. Although it is commonly thought that as a country starts to develop more we will see a decrease in pollution, it is not the case when it comes to resource damage. Because of industrial revolutions things like air quality and marine species are on a decline.

https://www.un.org/en/chronicle/article/closing-technology-gap-least-developed-countries

This article published by the UN cites that a primary reason that some countries that have not yet reached their full potential for economic development is that they have maintained a traditional approach in earning income such as joining the garment and agriculture business', and that their lack of access to technology and internet is what is preventing them to further progress.

The paper states that although the Geography Hypothesis might not be the best measure of economic development and progress, they mention that the "uneven dissemination and adoption of technologies" plays a crucial part in the economic development of some countries over others. For example, the paper mentions that in 1532 Mexico was one of the most prosperous countries in the world, but due to the industrial revolution and technological advances, North America was able to quickly overtake them in economic development. This shows that being able to be versatile in using and implementing more advanced technology into the country could be the main source of differentiation in economic development of an LEDC and an MEDC.

Hi Mr. Hopkins, I am Demir