1 c h a p t e r 6 1 © 2001 prentice hall business publishingeconomics: principles and tools,...
TRANSCRIPT
![Page 1: 1 C H A P T E R 6 1 © 2001 Prentice Hall Business PublishingEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/eO’Sullivan & Sheffrin Market Efficiency and Government](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032722/56649cf65503460f949c65d6/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
1
1
C
H A
P T
E R
6
© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing Economics: Principles and Tools, 2/eEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/e O’Sullivan & SheffrinO’Sullivan & Sheffrin
Market Efficiency and Government Intervention
![Page 2: 1 C H A P T E R 6 1 © 2001 Prentice Hall Business PublishingEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/eO’Sullivan & Sheffrin Market Efficiency and Government](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032722/56649cf65503460f949c65d6/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
2
© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing Economics: Principles and Tools, 2/eEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/e O’Sullivan & SheffrinO’Sullivan & Sheffrin
Social Interest and the Invisible Hand
Private market equilibrium may be efficient, that is, it may generate the largest possible net benefits for buyers and sellers.
The “invisible hand” is Adam Smith’s description of how individual buyers and sellers, each acting in their own self-interest, frequently promote the social interest.
![Page 3: 1 C H A P T E R 6 1 © 2001 Prentice Hall Business PublishingEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/eO’Sullivan & Sheffrin Market Efficiency and Government](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032722/56649cf65503460f949c65d6/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
3
© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing Economics: Principles and Tools, 2/eEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/e O’Sullivan & SheffrinO’Sullivan & Sheffrin
Social Interest and the Invisible Hand
Markets may not be socially efficient if buyers and sellers acting in their own self-interest generate outcomes that are contrary to the social interest.
To avoid socially inefficient outcomes, four assumptions about markets are necessary:
Informed buyers and sellers Perfect Competition No spillover benefits No spillover cost
![Page 4: 1 C H A P T E R 6 1 © 2001 Prentice Hall Business PublishingEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/eO’Sullivan & Sheffrin Market Efficiency and Government](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032722/56649cf65503460f949c65d6/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
4
© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing Economics: Principles and Tools, 2/eEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/e O’Sullivan & SheffrinO’Sullivan & Sheffrin
Consumer Surplus
The price a consumer pays for a good is usually less than the amount he or she is willing to pay. Consumer surplus measures the bonus or surplus received by the consumer.
Consumer surplus is the difference between the maximum amount a consumer is willing to pay for a product and the price the consumer actually pays.
![Page 5: 1 C H A P T E R 6 1 © 2001 Prentice Hall Business PublishingEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/eO’Sullivan & Sheffrin Market Efficiency and Government](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032722/56649cf65503460f949c65d6/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
5
© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing Economics: Principles and Tools, 2/eEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/e O’Sullivan & SheffrinO’Sullivan & Sheffrin
The Demand Curve and Consumer Surplus
Market consumer surplus equals the sum of the surpluses earned by all consumers in the market.
$30Market consumer surplus
7Siggy
01010Fivola
31013Forest
61016Thurl
91019Tupak
121022Juan
Consumer Surplus
Price Paid
Willing to Pay
![Page 6: 1 C H A P T E R 6 1 © 2001 Prentice Hall Business PublishingEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/eO’Sullivan & Sheffrin Market Efficiency and Government](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032722/56649cf65503460f949c65d6/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
6
© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing Economics: Principles and Tools, 2/eEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/e O’Sullivan & SheffrinO’Sullivan & Sheffrin
The Supply Curve and Producer Surplus
The minimum amount a producer is willing to accept is the marginal cost of producing the product, which includes the cutter’s opportunity cost of his or her time.
Producer surplus is the difference between the price a producer receives for a product and the minimum amount the producer is willing to accept for the product.
![Page 7: 1 C H A P T E R 6 1 © 2001 Prentice Hall Business PublishingEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/eO’Sullivan & Sheffrin Market Efficiency and Government](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032722/56649cf65503460f949c65d6/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
7
© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing Economics: Principles and Tools, 2/eEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/e O’Sullivan & SheffrinO’Sullivan & Sheffrin
The Supply Curve and Producer Surplus
Market producer surplus equals the sum of the surpluses earned by all producers in the market.
$20 Market producer surplus
12 Efrin
01010 Eve
210 8 Dee
410 6 Cecil
610 4 Bea
810 2 Abe
Producer Surplus
Price Received
Willing to Receive
![Page 8: 1 C H A P T E R 6 1 © 2001 Prentice Hall Business PublishingEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/eO’Sullivan & Sheffrin Market Efficiency and Government](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032722/56649cf65503460f949c65d6/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
8
© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing Economics: Principles and Tools, 2/eEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/e O’Sullivan & SheffrinO’Sullivan & Sheffrin
Market Equilibrium and Efficiency
Market equilibrium is efficient because it generates the highest possible total market value.
An imposed price above or below equilibrium would create inefficiency and reduce total surplus.
At a price of $10, total surplus in the market equals $50 = $30 + $20.
![Page 9: 1 C H A P T E R 6 1 © 2001 Prentice Hall Business PublishingEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/eO’Sullivan & Sheffrin Market Efficiency and Government](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032722/56649cf65503460f949c65d6/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
9
© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing Economics: Principles and Tools, 2/eEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/e O’Sullivan & SheffrinO’Sullivan & Sheffrin
Impact of an Imposed Maximum Price on the Total Surplus of the Market
A government- imposed maximum price is a price below equilibrium, designed to protect consumers.
At a maximum price of $4, the surplus of the first two consumers expands as the surplus of the first two producers drops.
Surpluses for the third and fourth lawns are lost entirely, so the total market value decreases.
![Page 10: 1 C H A P T E R 6 1 © 2001 Prentice Hall Business PublishingEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/eO’Sullivan & Sheffrin Market Efficiency and Government](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032722/56649cf65503460f949c65d6/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
10
© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing Economics: Principles and Tools, 2/eEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/e O’Sullivan & SheffrinO’Sullivan & Sheffrin
Impact of an Imposed Maximum Price on the Total Surplus of the Market
The maximum price of $4 prevents some beneficial transactions.
The third lawn cut would generate a net benefit of $10.
For example, the third consumer is willing to pay $16 to have his lawn cut, and the third producer is willing to cut it for $6.
![Page 11: 1 C H A P T E R 6 1 © 2001 Prentice Hall Business PublishingEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/eO’Sullivan & Sheffrin Market Efficiency and Government](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032722/56649cf65503460f949c65d6/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
11
© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing Economics: Principles and Tools, 2/eEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/e O’Sullivan & SheffrinO’Sullivan & Sheffrin
Impact of an Imposed Minimum Price on the Total Surplus of the Market
A government-imposed minimum price is a price above equilibrium. It benefits some producers but lowers the total value of the market.
The surplus of the first two producers expands as the surplus of the first two consumers disappears. Surpluses for the third and fourth lawns are lost entirely.
A price floor turns consumer surplus into producer surplus.
![Page 12: 1 C H A P T E R 6 1 © 2001 Prentice Hall Business PublishingEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/eO’Sullivan & Sheffrin Market Efficiency and Government](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032722/56649cf65503460f949c65d6/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
12
© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing Economics: Principles and Tools, 2/eEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/e O’Sullivan & SheffrinO’Sullivan & Sheffrin
Impact of an Imposed Minimum Price on the Total Surplus of the Market
The minimum price of $19 prevents some beneficial transactions.
The third lawn cut would generate a net benefit of $10.
For example, the third producer is willing to cut lawns at $6 per lawn, and the third consumer is willing to pay $16 for the cut.
![Page 13: 1 C H A P T E R 6 1 © 2001 Prentice Hall Business PublishingEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/eO’Sullivan & Sheffrin Market Efficiency and Government](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032722/56649cf65503460f949c65d6/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
13
© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing Economics: Principles and Tools, 2/eEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/e O’Sullivan & SheffrinO’Sullivan & Sheffrin
Government Intervention: Restricting Quantity
These programs may be intended to protect consumers, but instead create winners and losers and prevent mutually beneficial transactions from taking place.
Licensing programs place limits on the number of producers in a given market.
![Page 14: 1 C H A P T E R 6 1 © 2001 Prentice Hall Business PublishingEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/eO’Sullivan & Sheffrin Market Efficiency and Government](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032722/56649cf65503460f949c65d6/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
14
© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing Economics: Principles and Tools, 2/eEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/e O’Sullivan & SheffrinO’Sullivan & Sheffrin
The Market Effects of Taxi Medallions
A medallion policy fixes the number of taxis at 80 and increases the price to $3.60.
Initially, the market for taxis is in equilibrium at a price of $3 per mile and a quantity of 10,000 miles per day (100 miles per taxi).
![Page 15: 1 C H A P T E R 6 1 © 2001 Prentice Hall Business PublishingEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/eO’Sullivan & Sheffrin Market Efficiency and Government](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032722/56649cf65503460f949c65d6/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
15
© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing Economics: Principles and Tools, 2/eEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/e O’Sullivan & SheffrinO’Sullivan & Sheffrin
Winners and Losers From Medallions
Riders willing to pay between $3.00 and $3.60 per mile for taxi service are prevented from executing mutually beneficial transactions.
The first 80 taxi drivers that obtain medallions from the city for free are the winners of the medallion policy.
The medallion policy reduces both consumer surplus and producer surplus.
![Page 16: 1 C H A P T E R 6 1 © 2001 Prentice Hall Business PublishingEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/eO’Sullivan & Sheffrin Market Efficiency and Government](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032722/56649cf65503460f949c65d6/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
16
© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing Economics: Principles and Tools, 2/eEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/e O’Sullivan & SheffrinO’Sullivan & Sheffrin
Import Restrictions
With free trade, equilibrium in the sugar market occurs at 12 cents per pound and 360 million pounds (point i ).
Domestic producers do not participate in the market since they must receive more than 26 cents to begin producing (point m).
![Page 17: 1 C H A P T E R 6 1 © 2001 Prentice Hall Business PublishingEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/eO’Sullivan & Sheffrin Market Efficiency and Government](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032722/56649cf65503460f949c65d6/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
17
© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing Economics: Principles and Tools, 2/eEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/e O’Sullivan & SheffrinO’Sullivan & Sheffrin
Import Restrictions
A ban on imports of sugar brings equilibrium to point d.
The ban creates domestic producer surplus, but the gain by domestic producers is less than the loss to domestic consumers.
![Page 18: 1 C H A P T E R 6 1 © 2001 Prentice Hall Business PublishingEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/eO’Sullivan & Sheffrin Market Efficiency and Government](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032722/56649cf65503460f949c65d6/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
18
© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing Economics: Principles and Tools, 2/eEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/e O’Sullivan & SheffrinO’Sullivan & Sheffrin
Spillovers and Market Inefficiency
When there are spillover costs, the market equilibrium will be inefficient and government intervention may be beneficial.
Spillover PRINCIPLE
For some goods, the costs or benefits associated with the good are not confined to the person or organization that decides how much of the good to produce or consume.
![Page 19: 1 C H A P T E R 6 1 © 2001 Prentice Hall Business PublishingEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/eO’Sullivan & Sheffrin Market Efficiency and Government](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032722/56649cf65503460f949c65d6/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
19
© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing Economics: Principles and Tools, 2/eEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/e O’Sullivan & SheffrinO’Sullivan & Sheffrin
Spillovers Costs
Each ton of cardboard generates 5 gallons of waste at a cost of $2 per gallon. Then, the pollution cost per ton of cardboard equals $10.
When 50 tons of cardboard are produced, the pollution cost equals $500.
![Page 20: 1 C H A P T E R 6 1 © 2001 Prentice Hall Business PublishingEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/eO’Sullivan & Sheffrin Market Efficiency and Government](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032722/56649cf65503460f949c65d6/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
20
© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing Economics: Principles and Tools, 2/eEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/e O’Sullivan & SheffrinO’Sullivan & Sheffrin
Tradeoffs From Producing Less
When production drops to 40 tons, consumer and producer surplus decline.
The reduction in cardboard production reduces producer and consumer surplus, but also reduces the cost of pollution.
Since the savings from pollution (blue square) are greater than the loss of surplus (triangle), output reduction is good news.
![Page 21: 1 C H A P T E R 6 1 © 2001 Prentice Hall Business PublishingEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/eO’Sullivan & Sheffrin Market Efficiency and Government](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032722/56649cf65503460f949c65d6/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
21
© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing Economics: Principles and Tools, 2/eEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/e O’Sullivan & SheffrinO’Sullivan & Sheffrin
Determining the Optimal Amount of Pollution
To decide by how much to reduce cardboard production to coincide with the socially efficient amount, we can use the marginal principle.
Marginal PRINCIPLEIncrease the level of an activity if its marginal benefit exceeds its marginal cost, but reduce the level if the marginal cost exceeds the marginal benefit. If possible, pick the level at which the marginal benefit equals the marginal cost.
Marginal benefit: pollution savings per additional ton.
Marginal cost: loss of consumer and producer surplus per additional ton of cardboard produced.
![Page 22: 1 C H A P T E R 6 1 © 2001 Prentice Hall Business PublishingEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/eO’Sullivan & Sheffrin Market Efficiency and Government](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032722/56649cf65503460f949c65d6/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
22
© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing Economics: Principles and Tools, 2/eEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/e O’Sullivan & SheffrinO’Sullivan & Sheffrin
Tradeoffs From Producing Less
When output is reduced from 40 to 39 tons, the loss of consumer surplus equals $5 ($35-$30), and the loss of producer surplus equals $2 ($30 - $28).
The marginal cost of cutting production from 40 to 39 tons equals $7.
The vertical distance between supply and demand at a given quantity shows the marginal cost of reducing output, or loss of surplus.
![Page 23: 1 C H A P T E R 6 1 © 2001 Prentice Hall Business PublishingEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/eO’Sullivan & Sheffrin Market Efficiency and Government](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032722/56649cf65503460f949c65d6/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
23
© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing Economics: Principles and Tools, 2/eEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/e O’Sullivan & SheffrinO’Sullivan & Sheffrin
Finding the Socially Optimal Amount of Output
At 36 tons of cardboard, marginal benefit equals marginal cost and the quantity of cardboard is socially optimal.
When the vertical distance between supply and demand at a given quantity equals the $10 savings from pollution, the quantity of cardboard is optimal.
![Page 24: 1 C H A P T E R 6 1 © 2001 Prentice Hall Business PublishingEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/eO’Sullivan & Sheffrin Market Efficiency and Government](https://reader030.vdocuments.us/reader030/viewer/2022032722/56649cf65503460f949c65d6/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
24
© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing© 2001 Prentice Hall Business Publishing Economics: Principles and Tools, 2/eEconomics: Principles and Tools, 2/e O’Sullivan & SheffrinO’Sullivan & Sheffrin
Market Effects of a Pollution Tax
The pollution tax shifts the supply curve up by $10, and the market settles in equilibrium at a price of $37 and 36 tons of cardboard.
A pollution tax of $2 per gallon of waste increases the marginal cost of producing cardboard by $10 ($2 x 5 gallons per ton).
The tax forces firms to bear the full cost of production, including the cost of pollution.