1) Figure 4 shows that trade is based on differences in tastes because the PPFs for both nations are the same and the pretrade relative prices are different. 2) Figure 4 shows that trade is based on differences in tastes because the PPFs for both nations are different and the pretrade indifference curves are different. 3) Figure 4 shows that trade is based on differences in tastes because the PPFs for both nations are the same and the pretrade indifference curves are different. 4) Figure 4 shows that trade is based on differences in tastes because the PPFs for both nations are the same and the pretrade indifference curves are the same. Figure 4. The PPFs of Nation 1 and Nation 2 Corn (Tons) III B' A E B A' E' I' II' PB = 1

1) Figure 4 shows that trade is based on differences in tastes because the PPFs for both nations are the same and the pretrade relative prices are different. 2) Figure 4 shows that trade is based on differences in tastes because the PPFs for both nations are different and the pretrade indifference curves are different. 3) Figure 4 shows that trade is based on differences in tastes because the PPFs for both nations are the same and the pretrade indifference curves are different. 4) Figure 4 shows that trade is based on differences in tastes because the PPFs for both nations are the same and the pretrade indifference curves are the same. Figure 4. The PPFs of Nation 1 and Nation 2 Corn (Tons) III B' A E B A' E' I' II' PB = 1

Microeconomic Theory

12th Edition

ISBN:9781337517942

Author:NICHOLSON

Publisher:NICHOLSON

Chapter13: General Equilibrium And Welfare

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 13.3P

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Consider two countries, Korea and Malaysia, and two goods, lumber and automobiles. Korea’s PPF is biased towards automobiles, and Malaysia’s PPF is biased towards lumber. They have the normal, concave to origin, increasing opportunity cost shape.1. Draw the PPFs of both countries with lumber on the horizontal axis.2. Illustrate the autarky equilibria in both countries given our strong assumption about preferences (e.g. consumption in both countries always lies on the same line from the origin).
Q.1 Table below presents different combinations of a simple economy that uses its resources to produce guns or/and butter Option Butter (tonnes) Guns (units) A 0 15 B 1 14 C 2 12 D 3 9 E 4 5 F 5 0 a) Construct the PPC by drawing guns production on the vertical axis and butter production on the horizontal axis and determine its slope. b) Consider that the economy is producing at option C. Explain the concept of the opportunity cost if the economy increased the production of butter and moved its production to point D c) Calculate the opportunity cost if there is a move from C to D and later a further move from D to E d) Is the opportunity cost increasing or decreasing as the economy produces more butter? Fully explain why
Suppose countries A and B produce and consume (assuming convex preferences) apples and bananas using only labour. Unit labour cost for apples in country A are 2 and 1 in country B. Unit labour cost for bananas are 5 in country A and 4 in country B. The labour force is the same in both countries, and given by 100 in each country. Which three of the following statements are true? Each country has an absolute advantage. Allowing for international trade, the production of 100 apples and 20 bananas can occur in a global market equilibrium, but not in a market equilibria under autarky. Country A will produce apples, with or without international trade. Under autarky, the relative price for apples (price for apples/price for bananas) equals 0.4 in country A and 0.25 in country B. Country B has an absolute advantage in producing bananas. Allowing for international trade, the production of 60 apples and 40 bananas is feasible, but…
Assume that before trading, you are producing 40 crates of apples and 30 oranges. Your neighbor is producing 240 crates of apples and 20 oranges. Label these points on your PPFs from parts a and C pt a: You have an apple orchard and have recently added a small plot of land for oranges as well. In a growing season you have the capacity to harvest 100 crates of apples, or 50 of oranges. Draw your Production Possibilities Frontier, with oranges on the x axis, assuming that the opportunity cost of producing oranges remains constant. Pt c:Your neighbor also grows oranges and apples. In a season they are capable of harvesting 300 crates of apples, or 100 of oranges. Draw their PPF, with oranges on the x axis, again assuming that the opportunity cost of producing oranges remains constant.
Ana and Ivan each individually and simultaneously decide whether to spend the evening at a play or a concert. Ana prefers to attend the concert twice as much without Ivan than to attend the play without him, and she prefers this three times more than being in the same place with Ivan (and at that point, she doesn't care where they are). Ivan prefers being in the same place with Ana twice as much as being at the play without her, and he prefers this four times more than being without Ana at the concert. Both have von Neumann-Morgenstern (vNM) preferences. With what probability will Ivan choose to attend the concert in Nashe's equilibrium?
In 1938, major powers met in Munich to discuss Germany’s demands to annex part of Czechoslovakia. Let us think of the issue as the proportion of Czechoslovak territory given to Germany. Possible outcomes can be plotted on a single dimension, where 0 implies that Germany obtains no territory and 1 implies that Germany obtains all of Czechoslovakia: Most countries at Munich (“Allies” for short) wish to give nothing to Germany: their ideal point is 0, which gives them utility of 1. Their worst possible outcome is for Germany to take all of Czechoslovakia; hence an outcome of 1 gives them utility of 0. In between these extremes, the Allies could propose a compromise, X, which gives them utility of 1 – X. The question for the Allies is whether to propose a compromise or fight a war with Germany, which they are sure will ensue if they offer nothing. If they propose a compromise and Germany accepts, they get a payoff of 1 – X. If they fight, they win with probability p and lose with…
In 1938, major powers met in Munich to discuss Germany’s demands to annex part of Czechoslovakia. Let us think of the issue as the proportion of Czechoslovak territory given to Germany. Possible outcomes can be plotted on a single dimension, where 0 implies that Germany obtains no territory and 1 implies that Germany obtains all of Czechoslovakia: Most countries at Munich (“Allies” for short) wish to give nothing to Germany: their ideal point is 0, which gives them utility of 1. Their worst possible outcome is for Germany to take all of Czechoslovakia; hence an outcome of 1 gives them utility of 0. In between these extremes, the Allies could propose a compromise, X, which gives them utility of 1 – X. The question for the Allies is whether to propose a compromise or fight a war with Germany, which they are sure will ensue if they offer nothing. If they propose a compromise and Germany accepts, they get a payoff of 1 – X. If they fight, they win with probability p and lose with…
In 1938, major powers met in Munich to discuss Germany’s demands to annex part of Czechoslovakia. Let us think of the issue as the proportion of Czechoslovak territory given to Germany. Possible outcomes can be plotted on a single dimension, where 0 implies that Germany obtains no territory and 1 implies that Germany obtains all of Czechoslovakia Most countries at Munich (“Allies” for short) wish to give nothing to Germany: their ideal point is 0, which gives them utility of 1. Their worst possible outcome is for Germany to take all of Czechoslovakia; hence an outcome of 1 gives them utility of 0. In between these extremes, the Allies could propose a compromise, X, which gives them utility of 1 – X. The question for the Allies is whether to propose a compromise or fight a war with Germany, which they are sure will ensue if they offer nothing. If they propose a compromise and Germany accepts, they get a payoff of 1 – X. If they fight, they win with probability p and lose with…
In 1938, major powers met in Munich to discuss Germany’s demands to annex part of Czechoslovakia. Let us think of the issue as the proportion of Czechoslovak territory given to Germany. Possible outcomes can be plotted on a single dimension, where 0 implies that Germany obtains no territory and 1 implies that Germany obtains all of Czechoslovakia: Most countries at Munich (“Allies” for short) wish to give nothing to Germany: their ideal point is 0, which gives them utility of 1. Their worst possible outcome is for Germany to take all of Czechoslovakia; hence an outcome of 1 gives them utility of 0. In between these extremes, the Allies could propose a compromise, X, which gives them utility of 1 – X. The question for the Allies is whether to propose a compromise or fight a war with Germany, which they are sure will ensue if they offer nothing. If they propose a compromise and Germany accepts, they get a payoff of 1 – X. If they fight, they win with probability p and lose with…
The accompanying tables give production possibilities data for Gamma and Sigma. All data are in tons. Gamma's production possibilities A B C D E Tea 120 90 60 30 0 Pots 0 30 60 90 120 Sigma's production possibilities A B C D E Tea 40 30 20 10 0 Pots 0 30 60 90 120 Assume that before specialization and trade, Gamma and Sigma both chose production possibility "C." Now if each specializes according to comparative advantage, the gains from specialization and trade will be Multiple Choice 40 tons of pots. 20 tons of tea and 20 tons of pots. 20 tons of tea. 40 tons of tea.
As the manager at a local florist, you supervise two employees, Anita and Jerome. There are two tasks that need to be completed: floral arrangements and flower delivery. It takes Anita 30 minutes to finish one floral arrangement and it takes her 40 minutes to make one delivery. It takes Jerome 10 minutes to finish one floral arrangement and it takes him 30 minutes to make one delivery. a. Who has a comparative advantage in floral arrangements? What about deliveries? b. Suppose, initially, Jerome and Anita each spent 4 hours each day doing floral arrangements and 2 hours each day doing deliveries. If you changed their tasks so that each individual did nothing but the task for which they had a comparative advantage, how many more floral arrangements would your store make, and how many more deliveries?
a) Draw a production possibilities frontier (PPF) for a society that produces two goods, guns and wheat. Suppose this society has two political parties, party R (who want a strong military) and party L (who want a smaller military). Show points on your diagram that party R and party L chooses. b) Show graphically whether your PPF will change if all the resources used for both the goods were equally suitable for production of guns and wheat? c) Assuming that b stands and if all the resources are used for the production of guns, 20 guns can be produced and if all the resources are used for production of wheat, 80 units of wheat can be produced, then what is the opportunity cost of producing one gun?