1) Town of Bayport:
We have that the residents value the fireworks at
a total of 50+100+300=450$. That is the utility they gain. But they
would also have to pay 360$ for the fireworks. The total outcome is
450$+(-360$)=90$. Hence, the outcome is positive and the fireworks pass
the cost benefit analysis.
If the fireworks' cost is to be split
equally, we have that each of the 3 residents has to pay 360/3=120$. Let
us now do the cost-benefit analysis for everyone.
Jacques stands to gain 50$ from the fireworks but would have to pay 120$. He will vote against it.
Also, Kyoko will gain 100$ but would have to pay 120$. He will lose utility/money from this so he will vote against.
Musashi on the other hand, would gain 300$ and only pay 120$. He is largely benefitted by this measure. Only he would
We have that 2 out of the 3 would vote against the fireworks, so that the fireworks will not be bought. The vote does not yield the same answer as the benefit-cost analysis.
2) Town of River Heights:
We have that the total value of the fireworks to the community
is 20+140+160=320$. The total value of the fireworks is lower than
their cost so their cost benefit analysis yields that they should not be
bought.
However, let's see what each resident says. The cost to each resident is 360/3=120$. Rina is against the fireworks since she will only gain 20$. Sean and Yvette are for the fireworks since they gain 140$ and 160$ respectively, which are larger than the cost of the fireworks to each of them (120$). Hence, 2 will vote for the fireworks and one will vote against and fireworks will be bought.
Again, the vote clashes with the cost-benefit analysis.
3) The first choice is wrong. It is very difficult for a government to provide the exact types of public goods that everyone wants because that would be too costly; one cannot have a public good that everyone pays for so that only a couple of people enjoy it. In our example, we saw that in every case, a public good and its production would have sime supporters and some adversaries.
Majority rule is not always the most efficient way to decide public goods; as we have seen in the second case, the cost-benefit analysis yields that the fireworks are not worth it but they are approved by the majority nonetheless.
The final sentence is correct. The differing preferences of the people make a clearcut choice impossible and the government has to take into account various tradeoffs and compromises in order to determine which public goods to provide.
Answer:
b. adult literacy; infant mortality
Explanation:
Multiple choice <em>"life expectancy; internet usage
; adult literacy; infant mortality
; infant mortality; adult literacy
; access to clean water; life expectancy"</em>
<em />
Higher real GDP per capita would imply higher literacy rate and at the same time lower infant mortality as citizens would invest more in health and education. All the other options are wrong as higher real GDP per capita cannot lead to lower life expectancy or literacy rate.
Answer:
a)
Explanation:
Mutual funds are investment companies called AMC( asset management companies ) that gather funds from public by issuing units. These funds are then invested in financial securities and financial instruments likes bonds and shares. Mutual funds are managed by financial experts and are less risky for common public than direct investment in stock market.
Answer:
Marginal opportunity cost is the number of units of good 1 that are sacrificed for producing an additional unit of other good.
A) If we increase the production of butter from 1 to 2 then Guns production decreases from 36 to 26. Thus opportunity cost of second unit of butter is 10 guns.
B) Total opportunity cost of 2nd unit of butter = 18 guns
C) marginal opportunity cost of producing the third unit of butter = 12 Guns
D) Total opportunity cost of third unit of butter = 30 Guns
Answer:
False!
Explanation:
that's why they are different sizes, material, and weight!
Some american dollars are worth alot more than a dollar in say, mexico. Our resources are more valuable.
Glad I could help!
