1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
Mandarinka [93]
3 years ago
7

Suppose the government provides peanut butter to everyone free of charge and everyone consumes it to the point at which he recei

ves no additional satisfaction from another spoonful. Is this necessarily good? Group of answer choices Yes, because everyone is satisfied.
Social Studies
1 answer:
lora16 [44]3 years ago
7 0

Question:

Suppose the government provides peanut butter to everyone free of charge and everyone consumes it to the point at which he receives no additional satisfaction from another spoonful. Is this necessarily good?

A) Yes, because everyone is satisfied.

B) No, because there might be some cases where the resources used to produce peanut butter could have been better used to produce more of other products.

C) Yes, because the law of diminishing marginal utility indicates that in order to get the greatest amount of satisfaction from the use of resources, people should consume as much of every good as they can.

D) none of the above  

Answer:

The Correct Answer is  B)              

Explanation:

The question above speaks to the concept of Marginal Utility and how Marginal Analysis is used in Public Policy Formulation for <em>Optimal Decision Making.</em>

To get the explanation, you'd need to understand the basic terms. They are given below:

Utility is defined in economics as benefit enjoyed by consuming a product or service;

This means that Marginal utility of a good or service is the change in the utility derived due to an increase in the consumption of that good or service.

Marginal Analysis  is the process of breaking down a decision into a series of ‘yes or no’ decisions. More formally, it is an examination of the additional benefits of an activity compared to the additional costs incurred by that same activity.

In other words, does the added utility enjoyed or benefits derived from producing and consuming additional amounts of a good or service justify the additional costs spent in creating such good?  

That's exactly the question above.

One of the principles of economics is the Law of Diminishing Marginal Utility. It simply states that <em>the first unit of consumption of a good or service</em> yields more <em>utility</em> than the second and subsequent units, <em>with a continuing reduction for greater amounts.</em>

In other words, as one consumes more and more of a commodity, they derive less and less satisfaction from it.

So the question above seeks to clarify whether it is wise for the government to continue to supply peanut butter until marginal utility is Zero.

The rule and the answer therefore is this:

  • When total benefits rise more than total costs, then the action is logical.
  • When total costs rise more than total benefits, then the action is illogical.

The peanut butter may have been supplied free of charge, but they were not produced at zero costs.

Therefore to continue to supply after benefits have hit rock bottom would be counter productive.

The government may continue to supply for as long as there is some benefits being derived from the consumption of peanut butter and the cost of production is less than the benefits enjoyed.

Cheers!

You might be interested in
How did the phrase "remember the Alamo" encourage Texans to keep fighting even after they lost the battle at the Alamo?
AnnyKZ [126]

Answer:

The phrase "remember the Alamo" was a battle cry that kept the Texans encouraged to keep fighting the battle.

Explanation:

"Remember the Alamo" was a battle cry and a phrase used by Gen. Sam Houston and Col. Sidney Sherman. After the massacre of the Texans at Alamo in San Antonio and at Goliad on 6th March, 1836 and 27th March 1836 respectively.

The phrase became a battle cry for the Texans and a symbol of courage for Texans soldiers during the Battle for Texas Independence. Even after they lost the battle, the passion to gain independence did not die.

3 0
3 years ago
TAKING A POLL:
aleksandr82 [10.1K]

Answer:

No

Explanation:

I feel this way because in the future i'm going to need to know how to do my bills, pay for my insurance, and look for career options yet all im learning in school is math, science, English, and social studies which won't help me economically. I am in 8th grade.

7 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
How were the Japanese Americans treated during w.w.2? Why did some Americans think this was necessary? We're their fears justifi
Readme [11.4K]
Japanese Americans were put in camps in some places because it was thought they might try to contact Japan and betray America.
3 0
2 years ago
One of the concerns about the Orderly Liquidation Authority is that it would legitimize federal bailouts of large financial enti
cupoosta [38]

Answer: Option (A)

Explanation:

One of main interest in this particular case about Orderly Liquidation Authority tends to be that under this it might be able to legitimize the federal bailouts of the big financial corporation and thus tends to increase the <em>too-big-to-fail</em> problem.  This theory mostly asserts that some organizations, especially the financial institutions, become so large and also interconnected such that any critical step or failure could be disastrous for the whole economic system.

8 0
3 years ago
What conditions made life difficult for homesteaders what helped homesteaders survive give examples
expeople1 [14]

Homesteaders living on the great plains were what you call "Extremely Dramatic". There were lots of conditions on the great plains that affected settlers lives. Here are these problems; building houses, staying healthy, extreme weather, lack of fuel, Indian Attacks, lack of isolation, keeping clean, lack of water, and pests and vermin. The problem with the bugs were grasshoppers. Grasshoppers ruined their crops. Building houses from wood was expensive. The settlers couldn't afford building houses from wood, so they built it from sod. The walls and floors were infested with bugs and lice, because these homes were built from dirt and grass. It would leak in the homes when it rained. They also had problems staying healthy because of the insects. The insects that flew around would inject disease into their bodies. In other words, There are three things that helped them survive, and 3/3 of these examples issued technology. 1.) Barbed wire, 2.) steel plow, and 3.) windmills. The barbed wire was for housing reasons, the steel plow was for cutting through tough prairie sod, and the windmills for pumping water out of the ground. :)

3 0
3 years ago
Other questions:
  • True or false: according to a survey, 34% of respondents agreed that u.s. clothing and shoes are of better quality than foreign
    12·1 answer
  • How is the observable universe bigger than its age?
    11·1 answer
  • if the flame of a bunsen burner should accidnentally go out a student should immediately run over to the teacher and inform him/
    14·1 answer
  • The us house of representatives has how many year terms
    9·1 answer
  • Picasso's paintings often contained exaggerated sexual symbolism. This way of expressing a basic impulse
    10·1 answer
  • According to the definition of therapeutic exercise and the goal of designing an individualized program of therapeutic exercise,
    13·1 answer
  • Discussion self _ discipline and child rights including its limitations,<br>​
    13·1 answer
  • Brian researched how a person's intelligence quotient (IQ) is affected by exercise. First, people took an IQ test. Then, over 2
    10·1 answer
  • Explain in which specific ways you are making good use of the time you have now.
    13·2 answers
  • why are skilled human resources called an important infrastructure of development? write four any four reasons​
    13·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!