Covid-19 shocks to education supply: how 200,000 U.S. households dealt with the sudden shift to distance learning.

Among the extraordinary shocks to household life caused by the Covid-19 pandemic was the sudden shift to distance learning in K-12 schools. Gone were Monday through Friday routines of school day, extracurricular activities, and evening homework; schools scrambled to launch alternative delivery systems, expecting parents to step in and spend significant amounts of time helping children continue to learn. This study examines the sudden shift to distance learning using data from U.

Economic Approaches to Estimating Benefits of Regulations Affecting Addictive Goods.

The question of how to evaluate lost consumer surplus in benefit-cost analyses has been contentious. There are clear health benefits of regulations that curb consumption of goods with health risks, such as tobacco products and foods high in fats, calories, sugar, and sodium. Yet, if regulations cause consumers to give up goods they like, the health benefits they experience may be offset by some utility loss, which benefit-cost analyses of regulations need to take into account.

Graphic warning labels and the demand for cigarettes.

Background: In 2010, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) proposed requiring tobacco companies to add graphic warning labels (GWLs) to cigarette packs. GWLs are large prominently placed warnings that use both text and photographic images to depict health risks of smoking. The companies challenged FDA's authority on First Amendment grounds; the courts accepted that FDA could compel companies to add GWLs, but argued that FDA had not established that GWLs would significantly reduce smoking.

Decomposing growth in spending finds annual cost of treatment contributed most to spending growth, 1980-2006.

Researchers have disagreed about factors driving up health care spending since the 1980s. One camp, led by Kenneth Thorpe, identifies rising numbers of people being treated for chronic diseases as a major factor. Charles Roehrig and David Rousseau reach the opposite conclusion: that three-quarters of growth in average spending reflects the rising costs of treating given diseases.