Microeconomics
11th Edition
ISBN: 9781260507140
Author: David C. Colander
Publisher: McGraw Hill Education
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Question
Chapter 8, Problem 9IP
To determine
Impact of high tax on gasoline.
Expert Solution & Answer
Want to see the full answer?
Check out a sample textbook solution
Students have asked these similar questions
What are the costs of pollution according to the Lancet Commission on pollution and health? Why are those numbers likely to be an underestimate? Explain.
What happens in the market for a good that pollutes the air when it is manufactured if government decides to tax consumers when the product is purchased? Will this reduce the amount of air pollution?
It’s common to think that reducing pollution is necessarily costly because to reduce pollution we need to tax firms who will then produce less. But can you think of one example in which pollution might not only be unpleasant but might actually reduce production?
Chapter 8 Solutions
Microeconomics
Ch. 8.1 - Prob. 1QCh. 8.1 - Prob. 2QCh. 8.1 - Prob. 3QCh. 8.1 - Prob. 4QCh. 8.1 - Prob. 5QCh. 8.1 - Prob. 6QCh. 8.1 - Prob. 7QCh. 8.1 - Prob. 8QCh. 8.1 - Prob. 9QCh. 8.1 - Prob. 10Q
Ch. 8.W - Prob. 1QECh. 8.W - Prob. 2QECh. 8.W - Prob. 3QECh. 8.W - Prob. 4QECh. 8.W - Prob. 5QECh. 8.W - Prob. 6QECh. 8.W - Prob. 7QECh. 8.W - Prob. 8QECh. 8.W - Prob. 9QECh. 8.W - Prob. 10QECh. 8.W - Prob. 11QECh. 8.W - Prob. 12QECh. 8.W - Prob. 13QECh. 8.W - Prob. 14QECh. 8.W - Prob. 1QAPCh. 8.W - Prob. 2QAPCh. 8.W - Prob. 3QAPCh. 8.W - Prob. 4QAPCh. 8.W - Prob. 5QAPCh. 8.W - Prob. 1IPCh. 8.W - Prob. 2IPCh. 8.W - Prob. 3IPCh. 8.W - Prob. 4IPCh. 8.W - Prob. 5IPCh. 8.W1 - Prob. 1QCh. 8.W1 - Prob. 2QCh. 8.W1 - Prob. 3QCh. 8.W1 - Prob. 4QCh. 8.W1 - Prob. 5QCh. 8.W1 - Prob. 6QCh. 8.W1 - Prob. 7QCh. 8.W1 - Prob. 8QCh. 8.W1 - Prob. 9QCh. 8.W1 - Prob. 10QCh. 8 - Prob. 1QECh. 8 - Prob. 2QECh. 8 - How would an economist likely respond to the...Ch. 8 - Prob. 4QECh. 8 - Prob. 5QECh. 8 - Prob. 6QECh. 8 - Prob. 7QECh. 8 - Prob. 8QECh. 8 - Prob. 9QECh. 8 - Prob. 10QECh. 8 - Prob. 11QECh. 8 - Prob. 12QECh. 8 - Prob. 13QECh. 8 - Prob. 14QECh. 8 - Prob. 15QECh. 8 - Prob. 16QECh. 8 - Prob. 17QECh. 8 - Prob. 18QECh. 8 - Prob. 19QECh. 8 - Prob. 20QECh. 8 - Prob. 21QECh. 8 - Prob. 22QECh. 8 - Prob. 23QECh. 8 - Prob. 24QECh. 8 - Prob. 1QAPCh. 8 - Prob. 2QAPCh. 8 - Prob. 3QAPCh. 8 - Prob. 4QAPCh. 8 - Prob. 5QAPCh. 8 - Prob. 1IPCh. 8 - Prob. 2IPCh. 8 - Prob. 3IPCh. 8 - Prob. 4IPCh. 8 - Prob. 5IPCh. 8 - Prob. 6IPCh. 8 - Prob. 7IPCh. 8 - Prob. 8IPCh. 8 - Prob. 9IPCh. 8 - Prob. 10IP
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- Economists Kenneth Chay and Michael Greenstone found that in the two years following the passage of the Clean Air Act of 1970, the sharp reduction in air pollution also led to a decline in infant deaths. Although this and other studies provide compelling evidence of the link between pollution and infant health, it is not clear that reductions from the much lower levels of ambient pollution today would have the same effect. Which of the following reasons could explain this? A. Today, the level of pollution is much higher. Therefore, it will take a much larger reduction in air pollution to reap benefits similar to those in 1970. B. When levels of pollution are high, the marginal benefit of reducing pollution also is high. It follows therefore that the benefit of reducing air pollution in 1970 would be much higher than the benefit from a proportional reduction in air pollution today when the level of pollution is much lower. C. When levels of pollution are…arrow_forwardWhat are pollution havens? How are they created or why do they exist? Why do economists think they may change over time and develop policies to reduce pollution?arrow_forwardPollution is a negative externality. Why is it that the social optimum in a market that generates pollution will, generally, not result in zero pollution?arrow_forward
- How do economists determine the optimal amount of pollution control?arrow_forwardImagine the government of California has proposed a new tax on vehicles based on the amount of emissions they produce in a year. In 2019, there will be 20 tons of emissions produced. The governor’s office has run the calculations and found that the socially optimal level is 14 tons and the marginal damage from each unit of pollution is $150. Imagine there are two types of drivers in California: commuters and non-commuters. Imagine that the marginal cost of reducing pollution for commuters is MCA_C=150Q and the marginal cost of reducing pollution for non-commuters is MCA_N=30Q. Each type initially created ten tons of pollution each. Their total cost of reductions is equal to TCA_C=75Q^2 and TCA_N=15Q^2. How much would each type choose to reduce under the tax? Imagine the governor instead suggested forcing all drivers to reduce their emissions by 30% from their 2019 levels. How would the costs of reduction here compare to the taxation case (please provide actual numbers)? Do you…arrow_forwardIn which way could smoking exert a positive externality on others?arrow_forward
- The primary source of air pollution in the small town of Smokey, Nevada is a nearby steel mill. The local environmental agency has decided that the mill needs to reduce its emissions because the town's population is located directly downwind from it. Currently the agency is considering three different approaches to reducing pollution from the mill: a technology standard, an emission standard and an emission tax. Why might the owner of the mill prefer an emission standard to a technology standard that would produce the same level of emissions? a Because with emission standards the polluter is more flexible in selecting the technology that will minimize her abatement cost Ob. Because polluters usually try to stick to their existing technology O C. Because it has been proven to be easier to implement O d. Because polluters, as all producers are suspicious about new technologiesarrow_forwardThe table below shows the demand for pollution permits to emit hydrocarbons in a particular industrial park. Each permit allows the owner to release one tonne of pollutants into the atmosphere. Price per Pollution Permit Quantity of Permits $4,500 100 4,000 200 3,500 300 3,000 400 2,500 500 2,000 600 1,500 700 were charged, how many tonnes of pollutants would be discharged into the atmosphere, assuming a straight-line a. If fee for a pollution perm demand curve? Quantity: tonnes b. Suppose government were to set a fee of $2,500 per pollution permit. How many tonnes of pollutants would now be dumped? What is the total revenue received by government? Quantity: tonnes Total revenue: $ c. Suppose that a new technology allows for a significant reduction in hydrocarbons at a relatively low cost so that the demand for pollution permits in the industrial park drops by 200 tonnes. Assuming that government holds the permit fee at $2,500, how many tonnes of pollutants would now be dumped? What…arrow_forwardA developing country implements pollution laws for the first time. Initially, there are some relatively cheap ways to reduce pollution and results are easily evident. After twenty years, they've found that the more one reduces pollution, the higher the marginal benefit. the lower the marginal benefit. the lower the marginal cost.arrow_forward
- Define what is externality in detail.arrow_forwardEconomists define the efficient amount of fund pollutants as the amount that minimizes the sum of damage and control costs. Using this definition, they derive two general rules, one of which is that the efficient level of pollution is not generally zero. Briefly explain why this is true.arrow_forwardShow why we normally won’t want to pay what it would cost to eliminate every last bit of a negative externality such as air pollution.arrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
Economics (MindTap Course List)EconomicsISBN:9781337617383Author:Roger A. ArnoldPublisher:Cengage Learning
Economics (MindTap Course List)
Economics
ISBN:9781337617383
Author:Roger A. Arnold
Publisher:Cengage Learning