Consider a pure exchange economy with complete markets so that the Welfare Theorems apply. Which 2 of the following 8 options are false: If all Walrasian Equilibria are not Pareto efficient then someone's preferences must violate local non-satiation. If everyone's preferences satisfy local non-satiation then every Walrasian Equilibrium must be Pareto efficient. If there exists some Pareto efficient allocation which cannot be supported as a Walrasian Equilibrium for some choice of initial endowment, then at least one person has preferences violating at least one of local non-satiation, continuity and convexity. If preferences violate all three of local non-satiation, continuity and convexity then there must exist Pareto efficient allocations that can not be supported as Walrasian Equilibria for some choice of initial endowment. If everyone's preferences satisfy monotonicity then every Walrasian Equilibrium must be Pareto efficient. If everyone's preferences satisfy local non-satiation, continuity and convexity then every Pareto efficient allocation can be supported as a Walrasian Equilibrium for some choice of initial endowment.

Consider a pure exchange economy with complete markets so that the Welfare Theorems apply. Which 2 of the following 8 options are false: If all Walrasian Equilibria are not Pareto efficient then someone's preferences must violate local non-satiation. If everyone's preferences satisfy local non-satiation then every Walrasian Equilibrium must be Pareto efficient. If there exists some Pareto efficient allocation which cannot be supported as a Walrasian Equilibrium for some choice of initial endowment, then at least one person has preferences violating at least one of local non-satiation, continuity and convexity. If preferences violate all three of local non-satiation, continuity and convexity then there must exist Pareto efficient allocations that can not be supported as Walrasian Equilibria for some choice of initial endowment. If everyone's preferences satisfy monotonicity then every Walrasian Equilibrium must be Pareto efficient. If everyone's preferences satisfy local non-satiation, continuity and convexity then every Pareto efficient allocation can be supported as a Walrasian Equilibrium for some choice of initial endowment.

ENGR.ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

14th Edition

ISBN:9780190931919

Author:NEWNAN

Publisher:NEWNAN

Chapter1: Making Economics Decisions

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 1QTC

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Consider an exchange economy with 2 agents and 2 goods. In an Edgeworth-Bowley diagram, show and illustrate that if both agents have the same preferences, the contract curve is a straight line from the bottom left-hand corner to the top right-hand corner. Does it follow that if the agents do not have the same preferences, the contract curve is not a straight line? Suppose the two agents have the same endowments and the same preferences. Is mutually beneficial trade possible? Illustrate in an Edgeworth Bowley diagram. State and explain Walras Law. What are the implications of Walras’s Law? Illustrate Walras Law in an Edgeworth-Bowley diagram.
Consider a pure exchange economy, where each consumer has preferences described by a Cobb-Douglas utility function. Both consumers have exactly the same endowment. In such an economy, an equitable distribution of goods (where each individual consumes exactly half of each good) is a Walrasian equilibrium allocation? a. always, for any consumers' preferences b. only if consumers' preferences are exactly the same c. Never d. None of the above
Consider a two-person exchange economy in which person 1 owns 200 units of x and 100 units of y while person 2 owns 100 units of x and 200 units y. Suppose their preferences over the two goods can be represented as: U1 (x, y) = y + 50Inx U2 (x, y) = y + 150lnx 1. How much of x do they trade among each other? 2. Does the First Welfare Theorem (FWT) hold in this economy? 3. Can some individuals be made better off if we are at the Pareto efficient allocation?
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 1 and 2 in country B. Unit labour cost for bananas are 2 in country A and 5 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? A Country B has a comparative advantage in producing bananas. B Allowing for international trade, the production of 50 apples and 50 bananas can occur in a global market equilibrium feasible, but not in market equilibria under autarky. C Each country has an absolute advantage. D Allowing for international trade, the production of 50 apples and 50 bananas is feasible, but not under autarky. E Under autarky, the relative price for apples (price for apples/price for banans) equals 0.5 in country A and 0.4 in country B. F Country A will produce bananas, with or…
Consider a pure exchange economy, where each consumer has preferences described by a Cobb-Douglas utility function. Both consumers have exactly the same endowment. In such an economy, an equitable distribution of goods (where each individual consumes exactly half of each good) is a Walrasian equilibrium allocation. a. always for any consumers' preferences b.only if consumers' preferences are exactly the same c. never d. non of the above
Consider the figure attached which shows the combined production function of Anna and Bob.Suppose a scenario where the Government has introduced a new social welfare program to cater to the poor of the society, wherein the reservation wage increases from 2 bushels of wheat to 6 bushels of wheat. Draw a new diagram to show the impact of this welfare program and comment on who do you think would benefit from this intervention? Additionally, does the outcome of this intervention results in an allocation which is a pareto efficient one? Explain your reasoning. (Make sure your diagram is fully labelled)
####### Consider the following pure exchange, Edgeworth box economy. There are 2 consumers and 2 goods. Consumer 1 has an endowment of 3 units of good Y, while consumer 2 has an endowment of 3 units of good X. For both consumers the utility function is given by: U (x, v) = x^2y, where x and y denote the respective quantities of goods X and Y. Find the Walrasian equilibrium price ratio P/Pr and the Walrasian allocations. Does trade take place in equilibrium? i want answer in 1 hour. if you provide solution within time, i will upvote. thanks in advance
Figure shows the combined production function of Angela and Bruno. If the government introduces a new social welfare program to cater to the poor of the society, wherein the reservation wage increases from 2 bushels of wheat to 6 bushels of wheat how would you model the situation? Draw a new diagram to show the impact of this welfare program and comment on who do you think would benefit from this intervention? Additionally, does the outcome of this intervention results in an allocation which is a pareto efficient one? Explain your reasoning. (Please Make sure your diagram is fully labelled)
Consider an economy with 3 agents, Mohammed (M), David (D) and Susan (S). There are two goods available, good x, and good y. The marginal rates of substitution (where good x is on the horizontal axis and good y is on the vertical axis) are given by for Mohammed, for David and for Mohammed and David are both consuming twice as much of the good x than good y, while Susan is consuming equal amounts of x and y. A. What are the conditions for Pareto efficiency in an exchange economy? B. Are these consumption levels economically efficient? C. Can these consumption allocations be observed in a perfectly competitive equilibrium in an exchange economy without production? Explain.
In this problem, we want to think about the difficulties that governments face in agreeing to significantly reduce CO2 emissions in order to control climate change. In the context of climate change, what phenomenon does China’s utility function capture? What does this exercise tell us about the limitations of the first welfare theorem? What do you think is an important aspect of trade in reality which is not captured by this model?
Amy and Lela have following preferences for apples, pears and bananas where > means "preferred to." Amy: apple > pear > banana Lela: banana > apple > pear Assume there is one apple, one banana and one pear to divide between Amy and Lela and that they have no other goods. For each of the following allocations, say whether it is (Pareto) efficient or inefficient. 1. Amy gets the apple and the pear and Lela gets the banana [ Select ] ["Efficient", "Inefficient"] 2. Amy gets the banana and Lela gets the apple and the pear [ Select ] ["Efficient", "Inefficient"] 3. Amy gets the pear, apple and banana and Lela gets nothing [ Select ] ["Efficient", "Inefficient"]
Two individuals, Fred and Helen, are in an economy with no production, and each have the utility function U = 10XY. Prices of both X and Y are set at $1. Initial endowments for Fred are 10 units of X and 6 units of Y. Helen has 8 units of X and 12 units of Y. Find the general equilibrium prices and allocation, then show that the G.E. allocation is Pareto efficient.