Midterm Study Flashcards
What does gov do for members of society?
criminal justice system
rule of law = disincentivizes harmful behavior and protects property rights
provides certain goods and services
- national defense
- education
- healthcare
- infrastructure
- utilities
make regulations
- labour laws to protect workers/provide benefits
- environmental regulations to reduce pollution
- financial regulation to reduce fraud and protect investors
- competition law to maintain competition in markets and reduce unfair trading prices
Redistribute wealth and provide for the under-privileged
- progressive tax system (your tax amount depends on how much you make)
- HAS COSTS!!
What does gov do for businesses
Provides a stable trading environment
rule of law = enables enforcement of contracts
Macroeconomic policy = setting interest rates and making spending decisions
Tax and subsidies
- taxes required to fund gov polices and also reduce unwanted behaviors (smoking/drinking)
- given to encourage firms/individuals to do beneficial things (innovate)
Economically rational agent
selfishly maximizes their own anticipated utility (utility = happiness/absence of suffering)
- everyone has different utilities for different things
What is the argument of Adam Smith and the Invisible Hand?
Individuals/firms/businesses act in their own self interest, and in doing so they provide social welfare for the economy when doing transactions (SW is increased b/c they are better off after)
- e.g. Steve Jobs didn’t develop the iPhone to make consumers happy, he did it to make a huge profit. Since the smartphone business was so competitive, he had to make an insanely good product to compete
- markets are very effective at providing sophisticated goods which give significant utility, there is very little role for gov intervention in competitive markets –> question with respect to any public policy proposal is “why can’t the private sector do it?” –> gov needs to reduce monopoly power and provide public goods
Surplus (consumer/producer)
The difference between the utility of having the good and the utility of the transaction price
Social welfare
The sum of everyone’s utility (maximizing social welfare is usually gov. objective)
Free market
market where transactions are voluntary
Reasons for non-pareto efficiency/ non-maximized pareto efficiency
- imperfect competition
- information problems
- externalities
- public goods
- OCCASIONAL: coordination problems
All of these make it so rational agents participating in a free market may fail to maximize social welfare
How can social welfare be maximized?
- redistribution –> marginal utility of wealth decreases as the amount of wealth increases (taxes) –> downside = decreased incentives to work hard (don’t assume everyone has same MU curve)
- trade in free markets since buyers and sellers will be better off, otherwise transaction would not occur (everyone is rational)
Why do we create institutions
- To govern how transactions take place and to redistribute wealth
- creating institutions and implementing policies are both costly –> trade-off the gains we get from fixing market against the costs
- BE WARY institutions and policies may serve groups of special interest
What are policy’s and why do we create them
set of rules created and enforced by a governing body
- want to design rules that are fair and efficient –> tradeoffs between gaining additional social welfare and cost of implementing policy
incentives
linking an agent’s utility to some action or outcome (e.g. sales commissions, bonus, etc.)
opportunity cost
utility an agent gets by doing something else with their time/effort (best alternative) (e.g. time playing games vs time studying)
- exclude sunk costs
- include costs with no observed outlay (e.g. letting uni student live at home VS renting out their room)
willingness to pay
total utility an agent gets from a good (expressed in dollars)
transfer seeking
any activity that tries to increase one’s share of wealth without creating new wealth
- non productive, spend resources on getting more SW without increasing it (e.g. fraud, charity, fundraising, lobbying)
Marginalist principle
any policy should be carried out as long as the overall benefits exceed the costs
- amt spent on policy should be such that the benefit from the last dollar spent should be equal to the cost of raising that dollar (MB = MC)
- resource with multiple potential usages should be divided among those uses such that MB is equal between all (MBa and MBb form an X, the budget should be applied at Q* where they intersect)
Paradox of value (marginalist principle)
price of anything is determined based on the margin and not absolute value
- in areas where something is scarce, it will cost more, whilst in areas in which it is abundant, it will cost less (if its scarce, you get more MU from it)
- this is one argument for why free trade should happen –> better distribution = more balanced prices
- if something is abundant, it will intersect with demand in bottom right to show high quantity, low price
- if something is scarce, it will intersect with demand in middle/top left to show low quantity, high price
READING: Disaster Relief Economics
Paul Krugman = nobel prize winning economist
Eric Cantor = politician
Article: Cantor states that he can only help those affected by the hurricane if the gov budget in other areas are reduced (but he didn’t bring this up during any America waging wars). Krugman agrees on budget cuts and recommends to increases taxes and borrowing money since every dollar spent on disaster relief will have immense increases in SW. However, America has high levels of debt and borrowing more would bring the debt level to a concerning level –> if anything, America should increase taxes and decrease spending to pay back debt. Printing more money would only increase the inflation rate
incentives
people do more of something that is rewarded and less of something that is penalized (e.g. R&D tax credits, demand curve, Germany stopping Russian gas imports)
Peltzman Effect
people adjust their behavior to a regulation in ways that counteract the intended effect of the regulation (perverse incentives ((incentives act against intended idea) –> make cars safer = ppl drive more recklessly)
What are the limitations of financial incentives
it crowds out intrinsic motivations (e.g. late fee for daycare centre –> resulted in even more lates b/c getting there on time became an option, if they were late they didn’t need to rush, they just had to pay a fine)
Perfect competition
- prices set by market
- entry of new firms (or exit of unprofitable firms) drives profit to zero
- buyers and sellers have perfect information
- homogenous goods
- lots of buyers and sellers
What are the two kinds of efficiency
general meaning = absence of waste
- management/production efficiency = if a given level of output is being produced at lowest input usage –> focus on waste/absence of waste
- pareto efficiency = appropriate amount of each good bring produced (good allocation of resources) –> in markets and allocations of resources
management efficiency cons
- assumes most firms minimize costs and those who don’t efficiently go out of business
- however mgmt inefficiency does occur sometimes (X-inefficiency)
X-inefficiency
- incompetent management
- scared of sunk costs (psychological reasons)
- company growing too fast to organize workers well
- lack of motivators (financial/psychological)
- lack of competition
- luxury/differentiated goods (higher costs to differentiate good –> marketing, materials, etc.)
- subsidies (e.g. saving jobs –> inefficient usage of money b/c if the economy is strong the workers can find other jobs)
Pareto Efficiency
attained when it is impossible to re-allocate resources among a group of people in a way that would make at least one person better off without making anyone else worse off (doesn’t mean this is always the best allocation)
- no DWL
Pareto Improvement
at least 1+ person is made better off while no one is made worse off (increase SW)
Potential Pareto Improvement
reallocation of resources allows individuals who are net gainers to fully compensate the net losers –> overall better off
- e.g. regulate price of cheese = increase prices = increase farmer welfare, decrease consumer welfare, but overall farmer gain > consumer loss
- lobbying –> farmers will vote for whoever does the cheese policy the best (single issue voters) meanwhile consumers aren’t going to change their vote just because one party is adding a cheese regulation
- maximize social welfare
Deadweight loss (DWL)
Term used to measure the deviation from Pareto efficiency –> DWL is wasteful because it means not all mutually beneficial transactions were realized by both parties
- usually triangle shaped