Macroeconomics: Principles, Problems, & Policies
20th Edition
ISBN: 9780077660772
Author: Campbell R. McConnell, Stanley L. Brue, Sean Masaki Flynn Dr.
Publisher: McGraw-Hill Education
expand_more
expand_more
format_list_bulleted
Question
Chapter 5.A, Problem 2ARQ
To determine
The optimal size of project from the economic perspective.
Expert Solution & Answer
Want to see the full answer?
Check out a sample textbook solution
Students have asked these similar questions
There are two candidates in an election that compete only on the education budget they will enact if elected. The budget can be any integer from $1 to $8 and the distribution of voters’ preferences over these outcomes is given below. For example, there are 2 voters that prefer a budget of $1, 4 voters that prefer a budget of $2, and so on. Furthermore, all voters have single-peaked preferences. Assume the candidates’ sole objective is to receive as many votes as possible. (Image Attached)
a) Find a proposed budget for each candidate that constitutes an equilibrium. Explain.
The city council is to decide on a proposal to raise property taxes. Suppose Ms. Tuttle is the chair and the council’s other two members are Mr. Jones and Mrs. Doubtfire. The voting procedure works as follows: Excluding the chair, Mr. Jones and Mrs. Doubtfire simultaneously write down their votes on slips of paper. Each writes either for or against the tax increase. The secretary of the city council then opens the slips of paper and announces the vote tally. If the secretary reports that both slips say for, then the tax increase is implemented and the game is over. If both vote against, then the tax increase is not implemented and, again, the game is over. However, if it is reported that the vote is one for and one against, then Ms. Tuttle has to vote. If she votes for, then the tax increase is implemented, and if she votes against, then it is not. In both cases, the game is then over. As to payoffs, if the tax increase is implemented, then Mrs. Doubtfire and Mr. Jones each receive a…
Suppose that friends Jennifer, Stephanie, and Megan cannot agree on how much to spend for a bouquet of flowers to send to a person who allowed them to use her beach house for the weekend. Jennifer wants to buy a moderately priced bouquet, Stephanie wants to buy an expensive bouquet, and Megan wants to buy a very expensive bouquet. Assuming no paradox of voting, majority voting will result in the decision to buy Multiple Choice an inexpensive bouquet. a very expensive bouquet. a moderately priced bouquet. an expensive bouquet. B
Chapter 5 Solutions
Macroeconomics: Principles, Problems, & Policies
Knowledge Booster
Similar questions
- Voters arrive at a social ranking of alternatives by consulting a “holy book": the social ranking is the ranking found in this book. Which of the Arrow's axioms defining an attractive preference aggregation method is violated by this method? (a) Non-dictatorship (b) Independence of irrelevant alternatives (c) The Pareto principle (d) Unrestricted domainarrow_forwardTaylor, Faith, Jay, and Jessica are college roommates. They're trying to decide where the four of them should go for spring break: Orlando or Las Vegas. If they order the tickets by 11:00 PM on February 1, the cost will be just $500 per person. If they miss that deadline, the cost rises to $1,200 per person. The following table shows the benefit (in dollar terms) that each roommate would get from the two trips. Roommate Taylor Benefit from Orlando Benefit from Las Vegas Faith $1,250 $800 $550 $800 Jay Jessica $650 $600 $850 $1,050 The roommates tend to put off making decisions. So, when February 1 rolls around and they still haven't made a decision, they schedule a vote for 10:00 PM that night. In case of a tie, they will flip a coin between the two vacation destinations. The roommates will get the most total benefit if they choose to go to Given the individual benefits each roommate receives from the two trips, which trip will each roommate vote for? Fill in the table with each…arrow_forwardThree roommates are trying to renovate their kitchen. They decided to vote on whether or not it is worth renovating. If at least 2 people vote for the renovation, then it will happen and everyone would split the costs of renovation equally. Their utility functions are U1= (1+ R)y1; U2 = (2 + R)Y2 and U3 if the kitchen is renovated and 0 otherwise, and y;is the amount of money i spends on private consumption. Agent 1 has $900; Agent 2 has $2100 and Agent 3 has $1500; renovation project costs $1500 total. (3 + R)y3, where R=1 1. Will the house be renovated if no bribes are allowed? 2. Can they reach an agreement so that the house ends up being renovated?arrow_forward
- Consider three individuals with the following preferences: Suppose the following dynamic voting protocol is in effect: first, there is a vote between a and b; then the winner goes against c; and the winner of this contest will be implemented. Focus on SPE where voters do not use “weakly dominated” strategies at any stage. (a) Show that these preferences are single peaked, but sincere voting is not equilibrium behavior. (b) Characterize the SPE of this game under strategic voting by all players. (c) Consider a generalization in which the society H consists of H individuals and there are finite number of policies, R = {p1, p2,...,pM}. For simplicity, suppose that H is an odd number. Voting takes M − 1 stages. In the first stage, there is a vote between p1 and p2. In the second stage, there is a vote between the winner of the first stage and p3, until we have a final vote against pM. The winner of the final vote is the policy choice of the society. Prove that if…arrow_forwardIn 1938, major powers met in Munich to discuss Germany’s demands to annex part of Czechoslovakia. Let us think of the issue as the proportion of Czechoslovak territory given to Germany. Possible outcomes can be plotted on a single dimension, where 0 implies that Germany obtains no territory and 1 implies that Germany obtains all of Czechoslovakia Most countries at Munich (“Allies” for short) wish to give nothing to Germany: their ideal point is 0, which gives them utility of 1. Their worst possible outcome is for Germany to take all of Czechoslovakia; hence an outcome of 1 gives them utility of 0. In between these extremes, the Allies could propose a compromise, X, which gives them utility of 1 – X. The question for the Allies is whether to propose a compromise or fight a war with Germany, which they are sure will ensue if they offer nothing. If they propose a compromise and Germany accepts, they get a payoff of 1 – X. If they fight, they win with probability p and lose with…arrow_forwardConsider the following voting game. There are three players, 1, 2 and 3. And there are three alternatives: A, B and C. Players vote simultaneously for an alternative. Abstaining is not allowed. Thus, the strategy space for each player is {A, B, C}. The alternative with the most votes wins. If no alternative receives a majority, then alternative A is selected. Denote ui(d) the utility obtained by player i if alternave d {A, B, C} is selected. The payoff functions are, u1 (A) = u2 (B) = u3 (C) = 2 u1 (B) = u2 (C) = u3 (A) = 1 u1 (C) = u2 (A) = u3 (B) = 0 a. Let us denote by (i, j, k) a profile of pure strategies where player 1’s strategy is (to vote for) i, player 2’s strategy is j and player 3’s strategy is k. Show that the pure strategy profiles (A,A,A) and (A,B,A) are both Nash equilibria. b. Is (A,A,B) a Nash equilibrium? Comment.arrow_forward
- Let's call a committee of three people a "consumer." (Groups of people often act together as "consumers.") Our committee makes decisions using majority voting. When the committee members compare two alternatives, x and y, they simply take a vote, and the winner is said to be "preferred" by the committee to the loser. Suppose that the preferences of the individuals are as follows: Person 1 likes x best, y second best, and z third best. We write this in the following way: Person 1: x, y, z. Assume the preferences of the other two people are: Person 2: y, z, x; and Person 3 : z, x, y. Show that in this example the committee preferences produced by majority voting violate transitivity. (This is the famous "voting paradox" first described by the French philosopher and mathematician Marquis de Condorcet (1743–1794).)arrow_forwardMarta and Sara are two students that devote part of their free time to doing surveys for a market research company. The income obtained from this activity depends on the number of surveys they do, bearing in mind that the girls may freely choose the interviewees. As they both live in the same neighborhood in case, they just interview their neighbors (N), they compete for the same people and their monthly income is about 250 Euros. If they both choose to go to other neighborhoods of the city and interview strangers (S), they can carry out more surveys and both their incomes would be 400. If one of them decides to go and interview people in another neighborhood but the other one does not, the former will obtain income for 500, and the latter for 300, and vice versa. After receiving the order from the company, Marta is always the one who starts to work first. Sara has information about the places where Marta has done the surveys. Please: Represent this game extensively. Represent this…arrow_forwardMarta and Sara are two students that devote part of their free time to doing surveys for a market research company. The income obtained from this activity depends on the number of surveys they do, bearing in mind that the girls may freely choose the interviewees. As they both live in the same neighborhood in case, they just interview their neighbors (N), they compete for the same people and their monthly income is about 250 Euros. If they both choose to go to other neighborhoods of the city and interview strangers (S), they can carry out more surveys and both their incomes would be 400. If one of them decides to go and interview people in another neighborhood but the other one does not, the former will obtain income for 500, and the latter for 300, and vice versa. After receiving the order from the company, Marta is always the one who starts to work first. Sara has information about the places where Marta has done the surveys. Please: Now imagine that none of the girls can know…arrow_forward
- In a sideshow game. A player gets 3 balls to place into a Clown's mouth. Each ball is swallowed by the Clown and is then deposited into slots that can hold only 1 ball. Slots are numbered 1 to 9 and prizes are allocated to a player depending on the slot value of the three balls. If for example the first ball landed in slot 8, the second in slot 2 and the third in slot 1, the resulting prize number would be 821 as shown in Figure 3. 3rd 2nd 1st dol 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Figure 3: A prize number of 821 is shown for a side show game. a) How many resulting prize numbers are possible in this game? b) How many resulting prize numbers are possible that end with the number 1?arrow_forwardSuppose that Katie and Kelly each expect to receive $500 worth of marginal benefits from a proposed new recreation center, whereas Kerry expects to receive only $100 worth. If the proposed tax levied on each for the center would be $450, a majority vote will Multiple Choice pass this project. defeat this project and resources will be underallocated to it. defeat this project. pass this project and resources will be efficiently allocated to it.arrow_forwardEach one has ONE Senator who votes for their state and is elected only by the voters in their own state. Each Senator's vote is equal in the voting process. There are three projects being considered and each will only bring revenue into the one State in which it is built BUT all three projects, if built, will be built with Taxes paid by ALL of the population of all 5 states. District 1 is not considering a project at this time. District 2 is mostly urban and they want to build a Football stadium to attract tourists. District 3 is not considering a project at this time. District 4 wants to build a Space Exploration Research Center. District 5 wants to build an airport. The relevant Benefit (positive number) and Cost (negative number) to each district details are below: District I District II District III District IV District V O Regulatory Capture Logrolling Stadium ($) -30 80 -30 -30 -30 The Scenario outlined above is commonly known as: Kleptocracy Rent Seeking Airport ($) -25 -25 -25…arrow_forward
arrow_back_ios
SEE MORE QUESTIONS
arrow_forward_ios
Recommended textbooks for you
Principles of MicroeconomicsEconomicsISBN:9781305156050Author:N. Gregory MankiwPublisher:Cengage Learning
Principles of Economics (MindTap Course List)EconomicsISBN:9781305585126Author:N. Gregory MankiwPublisher:Cengage Learning
Principles of Economics, 7th Edition (MindTap Cou...EconomicsISBN:9781285165875Author:N. Gregory MankiwPublisher:Cengage Learning
Principles of Microeconomics (MindTap Course List)EconomicsISBN:9781305971493Author:N. Gregory MankiwPublisher:Cengage Learning
Principles of Microeconomics
Economics
ISBN:9781305156050
Author:N. Gregory Mankiw
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Principles of Economics (MindTap Course List)
Economics
ISBN:9781305585126
Author:N. Gregory Mankiw
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Principles of Economics, 7th Edition (MindTap Cou...
Economics
ISBN:9781285165875
Author:N. Gregory Mankiw
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Principles of Microeconomics (MindTap Course List)
Economics
ISBN:9781305971493
Author:N. Gregory Mankiw
Publisher:Cengage Learning