Erhan's opportunity cost of 1 bushel of corn is 3 bushels of wheat. Panikos' opportunity cost of 1 bushel of wheat is 2 bushels of corn. Suppose that Erhan and Panikos specialize according to their comparative advantage. Then, O A. Erhan produces only wheat. O B. Erhan produces only corn. C. Panikos produces only wheat. D. Statements B and C are correct. O E. None of the above

Erhan's opportunity cost of 1 bushel of corn is 3 bushels of wheat. Panikos' opportunity cost of 1 bushel of wheat is 2 bushels of corn. Suppose that Erhan and Panikos specialize according to their comparative advantage. Then, O A. Erhan produces only wheat. O B. Erhan produces only corn. C. Panikos produces only wheat. D. Statements B and C are correct. O E. None of the above

Exploring Economics

8th Edition

ISBN:9781544336329

Author:Robert L. Sexton

Publisher:Robert L. Sexton

Chapter28: International Trade

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 8P

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

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.
Suppose that Poland and Wales both produce ale and glass. Poland's opportunity cost of producing a pane of glass is 4 kegs of ale while Wales's opportunity cost of producing a pane of glass is 12 kegs of ale. By comparing the opportunity cost of producing glass in the two countries, you can tell thatWales has a comparative advantage in the production of glass andPoland has a comparative advantage in the production of ale. Suppose that Poland and Wales consider trading glass and ale with each other. Poland can gain from specialization and trade as long as it receives more than of ale for each pane of glass it exports to Wales. Similarly, Wales can gain from trade as long as it receives more than of glass for each keg of ale it exports to Poland. Based on your answer to the last question, which of the following prices of trade (that is, price of glass in terms of ale) would allow both Wales and Poland to gain from trade? Check all that apply. 8 kegs of…
Are the following statements true or false? Explain ineach case.a. “Two countries can achieve gains from trade evenif one of the countries has an absolute advantagein the production of all goods.”b. “Certain talented people have a comparativeadvantage in everything they do.”c. “If a certain trade is good for one person, it can’tbe good for the other one.”d. “If a certain trade is good for one person, it isalways good for the other one.”e. “If trade is good for a country, it must be good foreveryone in the country
Givenw: (1) two nations (1 and 2) which have the sametechnology but different factor endowments and tastes, (2)two commodities (X and Y) produced under increasingcosts conditions and (3) no transportation costs, tariffs orother obstructions to trade.Prove geometrically that mutually advantageous tradebetween the two nations is possible.Note: Your answer should show the autarky (no-trade) andfree-trade points of production and consumption for eachnation, show gains from trade of each nation and expressthe equilibrium condition that should prevail when trade Stop equilibrum
2. In the USA 1 unit of labor can produce 50 cars while in Canada 1 unit of labor can produce5 cars. The total amount of labor in each country is L = 100. Which one of these statements iscorrect?A. Canada has comparative advantage on the production of cars.B. The USA has comparative advantage on the production of cars.C. Since their production possibility frontiers are the similar neither country has comparativeadvantage on the production of cars.D. Not enough information to answer this question.
a. Differentiate absolute advantage from comparative advantage. Explain how a country should specialize given analysis of their comparative advantage b.When countries specialize based on their comparative advantage and trade with each other, how does it lead to gains from trade for both countries (even if one country has an absolute advantage in both goods)?
. Which country has an absolute advantage in the production of fruit? Which countryhas an absolute advantage in the production of timber?b. Which country has a comparative advantage in the production of fruit? of timber?c. Sketch the PPF’s for both countries.d. Assuming no trading between the two, if both countries wanted to have equalnumbers of feet of timber and baskets of fruit, how would they allocate workers tothe two sectors?e. Show that specialization and trade can move both countries beyond their PPF’s.
Suppose that the opportunity cost ratio for apples and oranges is 1AE =30 in Germany but 10= 2A in Japan At which of the following international eschange ratios (terms of trade) with Gemany andJapan be willing to specialize and engage in trade with each otherO10=215AO 10= 1.25AO 10=0.25AO 10=0.15A
Draw the production possibility curve for each country using the data provided in the table. b. Which country has an absolute advantage in what product? Which country has a comparative advantage in what product? Show your work! c. Without trade, what is the price of food in terms of computers for both countries? Showyour work! d. What is the range of prices (i.e., the CPC) at which trade can occur? Also, show (a) the possible CPC for each country and (b) the possible production and consumption possibility lines for both countries after trade. Show your work!
1.Suppose we have the following information about the productivity of industry inJapan and Korea. The data are the units of output per hour of work.Steel TelevisionsJapan 6 3Korea 8 2A Japanese worker can produce 6 units of steel or 3 televisions per hour. A Korean workercan produce 8 units of steel or 2 televisions per hour. Plot the production possibilities frontierfor each country, assuming each country has only one worker and the worker works only onehour. To plot the frontier, plot the end points and connect them with a line. For example, Japancan produce 6 units of steel with its worker or 3 televisions. It can also allocate 1/2 hour to the production of each and get 3 units of steel and 1 1/2 televisions. a) What is the range of prices at which each country would be willing to exchange?
1.Under what conditions is the production possi bilities frontier linear rather than bowed out? 2.Explain how absolute advantage and compara-tive advantage differ. 3.Give an example in which one person has anabsolute advantage in doing something butanother person has a comparative advantage. 4.Is basoute advantage or comparative advantage more important for trade? Explain yourreasoning using the example in your answer toQuestion 3..If two parties trade based on comparativeavantage an ot gain, in wat range mustthe price of the trade lie?.Will a nation tend to export or import goods forwhich it has a comparative advantage?
4. Assume a two-country two-good two-input model. Let the countries in the model be Vietnam andMyanmar and the goods be shirts and natural gas. The two factors of production are labor and land.Further, Vietnam is labor-abundant and shirts production is labor-intensive. Suppose, in the absenceof trade, Vietnam operates at a point on its production-possibility curve where it produces andconsumes 20 units of shirts and 25 units of natural gas. Once it engages in free trade, the internationalprice of one unit of natural gas is .8 units of a shirt. In response to the opening of trade, Vietnammoves along its production-possibility curve to a new point where it produces 100 units of shirts and10 units of natural gas. Assume that with free trade, Vietnam chooses to consume 52 units of shirtsand chooses to trade all of its remaining surplus of shirts.a. Demonstrate the gains to trade for Vietnam.