If only Congress would mandate more frequent and longer vacations we could increase the number of jobs (sarc):

According to the American Shore & Beach Preservation Association (ASBPA), which publishes the peer-reviewed “Shore & Beach,” the travel and tourism industry accounts for 10 percent of the U.S. job market, “more than all U.S. manufacturers combined.”

While officials including U.S. Rep. Mike McIntyre (D-NC7) have said every dollar invested in beach nourishment returns $320 in tax revenues, ASBPA in a press release Tuesday said the return in 2012 was as high as $570.

via portcitydaily.com

That number, 320/1, sounds high, but even so taxes are transfers so the net effect is zero. Beach nourishment spending should be compared to the consumer surplus gains of the beach trips and the value of protected property to determine if nourishment is a good idea. 

Posted in ,
  1. Caseyj Avatar

    John
    Doesn’t that assume the tax dollar would have been spent elsewhere by the private sector and the fiscal multiplier is zero?

  2. John Whitehead Avatar

    Yes, I’m thinking of a hotel tax incidence analysis
    My BCAs don’t involve macro impacts

  3. Barry Kapilow-Cohen Avatar




    link to Robert Kennedy’s Benefit Cost Analysis speech.
    Regardless of the econ course I am teaching, I find the hardest concept to get across is the amorality of economics. Good == Efficiency == Maximizing aggregate output from available resources.
    The ‘Who gets the good stuff question? ‘is mentioned in the beginning of most introductory textbooks, however, the question is rarely (I have not read all intro textbooks)mentioned again. By the end of the course they are ready to build a monument to Mussolini’s economic advisor, Pareto.

Leave a Reply

Discover more from Environmental Economics

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading