Suppose the wage increases to $200.00200.00 but that the firm chooses to keep using the same amount of labor and capital to pro
duce 200 units of output. Given this new set of factor prices (w'equals=$200.00200.00, requals=$100.00100.00), how much have costs changed if the set of input choices remains at point A? $nothing. (Enter a numeric
1 answer:
Question:
The question is incomplete. See the complete question below and the graph.
You are given the following data;
Cost = C = $12,000.00
w = $100.00 per unit of labor
r = $100.00 per unit of capital
These data are used to construct the isocost line (C) in the diagram to the right. Suppose the wage increases to $200.00 but that the firm chooses to keep using the same amount of labor and capital to produce 200 units of output. Given this new set of factor prices (w'=$200.00, r = $100.00), how much have costs changed if the set of input choices remains at point A? Enter a numeric response using a real number rounded to two decimal places.)
Answer:
Cost change = $6,000
Explanation:
Given Data:
Cost = C = $12,000.00
w = $100.00 per unit of labor
r = $100.00 per unit of capital
Calculating the cost incurred at point A using the equation of iso-costline C¹, we have;
C = wl + rk
where;
C = total cost
w = price of labor = $100
l = labor = 60 unit from the graph
k = capital = 60 unit from the graph
r = price of capital = $100
Substituting into the formula, we have
C = wl + rk
= 100*60 + 100*60
= 6000+6000
= $12,000
For increase in wages(w= $200, r = $100) with same amount of labor and capital, the cost incurred becomes;
C = wl + rk
= 200*60+100*60
= 12,000 + 6000
= $18,000
Therefore,
Cost change = 18000-12000
= $6,000
See the attached graph.
You might be interested in
Answer:
The answer is "choice a"
Explanation:
In the given question the missing choices is added in attached file please find it.
The additional output produced through hiring an extra item of such an input reflects the marginal product (MP). For the very first time. for example, its marginal labor productivity was increased output generated by recruiting additional work.
This law diminishing marginal returns as more as units that even the marginal result of even an input, that is hired input.
In other words, any additional work input would generate less than a previous employee because recruiting additional workers decreases expected revenue on jobs, the laid-off of employees, which means the Labor would grow expected revenue.
In Japan is laying off fewer employees even despite the slowdown it continues to produce strong outputs. The lower-priced revenues and their work remain constant along with their steady overall performance.
Your medium product (total) item divided by total work would stay intact. United states staff layover to the other side. It laid-off the staff equals higher marginal labor for overall returns it's going to be higher production besides that, lower labor in the United States could mean an increase in the gross labor output but a larger for Japan, more then, that's why the choice a is correct.
