Subpart (a):
Calculate the member of required labor.
Subpart (a):
Explanation of Solution
Number of workers required to produce one unit of goods can be calculated using the following formula.
Substitute the respective values in Equation (1) to calculate the required number of person to produce one unit of car in U.S.
Required labor to produce one unit of car in U.S. is 0.25.
Table 1 illustrates the workers required to produce a car and a ton of grain in the U.S. and the Japan that obtained by using Equation (1).
Table 1
Workers required to produce | ||
One Car | One Ton of Grain | |
U.S. | 0.25 workers | 0.10 workers |
Japan | 0.25 workers | 0.20 workers |
Concept introduction:
Subpart (b):
Draw the production possibility frontier.
Subpart (b):
Explanation of Solution
Figure 1 shows the productive capacity of two countries.
In Figure 1, the horizontal axis measures the quantity of grains produced by both the countries and the vertical axis measures the quantity of cars produced. If either economy, that is, the U.S. or Japan devotes all of its 100 million workers in producing cars each economy can produce 400 million cars in a year
Concept introduction:
Production Possibility Frontier (PPF): PPF refers to the maximum possible combinations of output of goods or services that an economy can attain by efficiently utilizing and employing full resources.
Subpart (c):
Calculate the opportunity cost.
Subpart (c):
Explanation of Solution
Opportunity cost of a car for the U.S. is calculated as follows.
Thus, the opportunity cost of a car for the U.S. is 2.5 tons of grains.
Opportunity cost of a car for Japan is calculated as follows.
Thus, the opportunity cost of a car for Japan is 1.25 tons of grains.
Opportunity cost of producing a ton of grains in the U.S. is calculated as follows
Thus, the opportunity cost of producing a ton of grains in the U.S. is 0.4 units of cars.
Opportunity cost of producing a ton of grains in Japan is calculated as follows.
Thus, the opportunity cost of producing a ton of grains in Japan is 0.8 units of cars.
The results can be tabulated in Table 2 below.
Table 2
Opportunity Cost | ||
One Car | One Ton of Grain | |
U.S. | 2.5 tons of grains | 0.4 units of car |
Japan | 1.25 tons of grains | 0.8 units of car |
Concept introduction:
Opportunity cost: Opportunity cost is the cost of a foregone alternative, that is, the loss of other alternative when one alternative is chosen.
Subpart (d):
Find the country that has absolute advantage in the production of goods.
Subpart (d):
Explanation of Solution
Neither of these countries has an absolute advantage in producing cars. This is because they are equally productive in the production of a car (4 cars per worker per year). However, in the production of grains, the United States has an absolute advantage because it is more productive than Japan. The U.S. can produce 10 tons of grains per worker per year; whereas Japan can produce only 5 tons of grains per worker per year.
Concept introduction:
Absolute advantage: It is the ability to produce a good using fewer inputs than another producer.
Subpart (e):
Find the country that has absolute advantage in the production of goods.
Subpart (e):
Explanation of Solution
Japan has a
Concept introduction:
Comparative advantage: It refers to the ability to produce a good at a lower opportunity cost than another producer.
Subpart (f):
Calculate the total production before the trade.
Subpart (f):
Explanation of Solution
Without trade and with half the workers in each country producing each of the goods, the United States would produce 200 million cars
Concept introduction:
Trade: The trade refers to the exchange of capital, goods, and services across different countries.
Subpart (g):
Gains from trade for the U.S. and Japan.
Subpart (g):
Explanation of Solution
Firstly, consider the situation without trade in which each country is producing some cars and some grains. Suppose the United States shifts its one worker from producing cars to producing grain, then that worker would produce 4 cars and 10 additional tons of grain. Now suppose, with trade, the United States offers to trade 7 tons of grain to Japan for 4 cars. The United States would encourage this because the cost of producing 4 cars in the United States is 10 tons of grain. So by trading, the United States can gain 4 cars for a cost of only 7 tons of grain. Hence, it is better off by 3 tons of grain.
The same is applicable for Japan, if Japan changes one worker from producing grain to producing cars. That worker would produce 4 more cars and 5 fewer tons of grain. Japan will take the trade because Japan will be better off by 2 tons of grain.
So with the trade and the change of one worker in both the United States and Japan, each country gets the same amount of cars as before but gets additional tons of grain (3 tons of grains for the United States and 2 tons of grains for Japan) making both countries better off.
Concept introduction:
Trade: The trade refers to the exchange of capital, goods, and services across different countries.
Want to see more full solutions like this?
Chapter 3 Solutions
Principles of Economics, 7th Edition (MindTap Course List)
- answerarrow_forwardDiscuss the preferred deterrent method employed by the Zambian government to combat tax evasion, monetary fines. As noted in the reading the potential penalty for corporate tax evasion is a fine of 52.5% of the amount evaded plus interest assessed at 5% annually along with a possibility of jail time. In general, monetary fines as a deterrent are preferred to blacklisting of company directors, revoking business operation licenses, or calling for prison sentences. Do you agree with this preference? Should companies that are guilty of tax evasion face something more severe than a monetary fine? Something less severe? Should the fine and interest amount be set at a different rate? If so at why? Provide support and rationale for your responses.arrow_forwardNot use ai pleasearrow_forward
- For the statement below, argue in position for both in favor or opposed to the statement. Incompetent leaders can't be ethical leaders. Traditional leadership theories and moral standards are not adequate to help employees solve complex organizational issues.arrow_forwardpresentation on "Dandelion Insomnia." Poemarrow_forwardDon't used Ai solutionarrow_forward
- "Whether the regulator sells or gives away tradeable emission permits free of charge, the quantities of emissions produced by firms are the same." Assume that there are n identical profit-maximising firms where profit for each firm is given by π(e) with л'(e) > 0; π"(e) < 0 and e denotes emissions. Individual emissions summed over all firms gives E which generates environmental damages D(E). Show that the regulator achieves the optimal level of total pollution through a tradeable emission permit scheme, where the permits are distributed according to the following cases: Case (i) the firm purchases all permits; Case (ii) the firm receives all permits free; and Page 3 of 5 ES30031 Case (iii) the firm purchases a portion of its permits and receives the remainder free of charge.arrow_forwardcompare and/or contrast the two plays we've been reading, Antigone and A Doll's House.arrow_forwardPlease answer step by steparrow_forward
- Suppose there are two firms 1 and 2, whose abatement costs are given by c₁ (e₁) and C2 (е2), where e denotes emissions and subscripts denote the firm. We assume that c{(e) 0 for i = 1,2 and for any level of emission e we have c₁'(e) # c₂' (e). Furthermore, assume the two firms make different contributions towards pollution concentration in a nearby river captured by the transfer coefficients ε₁ and 2 such that for any level of emission e we have C₂'(e) # The regulator does not know the resulting C₁'(e) Τι environmental damages. Using an analytical approach explain carefully how the regulator may limit the concentration of pollution using (i) a Pigouvian tax scheme and (ii) uniform emissions standards. Discuss the cost-effectiveness of both approaches to control pollution.arrow_forwardBill’s father read that each year a car’s value declines by 10%. He also read that a new car’s value declines by 12% as it is driven off the dealer’s lot. Maintenance costs and the costs of “car problems” are only $200 per year during the 2-year warranty period. Then they jump to $750 per year, with an annual increase of $500 per year.Bill’s dad wants to keep his annual cost of car ownership low. The car he prefers cost $30,000 new, and he uses an interest rate of 8%. For this car, the new vehicle warranty is transferrable.(a) If he buys the car new, what is the minimum cost life? What is the minimum EUAC?(b) If he buys the car after it is 2 years old, what is the minimum cost life? What is the minimum EUAC?(c) If he buys the car after it is 4 years old, what is the minimum cost life? What is the minimum EUAC?(d) If he buys the car after it is 6 years old, what is the minimum cost life? What is the minimum EUAC?(e) What strategy do you recommend? Why? Please show each step and formula,…arrow_forwardO’Leary Engineering Corp. has been depreciating a $50,000 machine for the last 3 years. The asset was just sold for 60% of its first cost. What is the size of the recaptured depreciation or loss at disposal using the following depreciation methods?(a) Straight-line with N = 8 and S = 2000(b) Double declining balance with N = 8(c) 40% bonus depreciation with the balance using 7-year MACRS Please show every step and formula, don't use excel. The answer should be (a) $2000 loss, (b) $8000 deo recap, (c) $14257 dep recap, thank you.arrow_forward
- Brief Principles of Macroeconomics (MindTap Cours...EconomicsISBN:9781337091985Author:N. Gregory MankiwPublisher:Cengage LearningEssentials of Economics (MindTap Course List)EconomicsISBN:9781337091992Author:N. Gregory MankiwPublisher:Cengage Learning