Friday, January 26, 2007

PPC's

There is a more detailed explanation on increasing/decreasing/constant OC in regards to PPC's in the last post. A question was posted there.

I made a boo-boo - you need 2 posts per week. Yes, they can be questions. No problem. It's a basis for discussion. Feel free to answer someone's question if no one has yet.

Avoid "yeah" answers - giving info that isn't there yet is much better. Or expanding in general.

Fun, fun! Test on Tuesday -

KM

22 comments:

joelleb said...

Just posting to get my address out there :)

domino said...

i am also posting so you have my address.

Gina said...

I am just posting to get my address out too.

Gina said...

Are we supposed to have posted two comments by Monday? Besides a civil war causing capital and consumer goods production to decrease, could a natural disaster be another reason?

domino said...

in response to gina's question: yes, a natural diaster could decrease production of goods. as could a stock market crash/too many loans, like what started the great depression.

domino said...

i have a question: in class, a point outside the production possibilities curve was inefficient because it was an over use of resources, but according to the chapter, hte point is infeasible because it cannot be reached with the scarce anount of resources available. i'm wondering, which is it? or can it be either?

Dan said...

Hello, here is my empty blog for now...
Question, the production curve, can you really over utilize the resources? Would you not have the curve along the maximum amount of usage to show maximum production? Or is this another curve?

Dan said...

Hmmm, well seeing as I need another post before tomorrow: In Part B of the homework about Debbie and Mike, there is no advantage to either one doing the chores is there? Overall, it takes them each 1 and a half hours to do both chores, though, different amounts for each chore. I am supposed to use the lowest opportunity cost right?

joelleb said...

dan,
in response to your first question, i don't really think the point beyond the curve is actually realistic. Any country wouldn't have enough resources to exceed effeciency, or the points along the curve. Perphaps economists put this point on the graph as a contrast to the underutilzation of resources (which is possible)

KM said...

Because this is the first week, I'll have pity. Ha! One for this week is fine - since I forgot to tell you in class.

Did all of you get the notes I sent? I'll try to remember to mention it tomorrow.

KM said...

I was going to mention more on ppc's - but I think I'll wait and see if anyone else has opinions.

Trade - remember, trade is always good if both will prosper from it. So - if Mike and Debbie can benefit from specializing and trading - it's good.

Did you figure out where we left on Friday? Please tell me that someone noticed that the answer I didn't give you was in the reading...please...please...

Wojtek said...

Please correct me if I'm wrong:
We have to post two comments, about current material, every week on this "main blog" and additional one on our blog commenting on an article or some economical event?

Concerning PPC's:
Mrs. McDaniel, you told us that a PPC always slopes downward and is continues. It can be a straight line but can also be bowed out from the origin. My question is can it be bowed in toward the origin? I think that it can't but this is only a presumption.

hehe lucky me, I just read the post about first week exemption to write two posts. It is worth to do your homework as late as possible ;)

keri said...

I am also posting to get my little address out there as well. But while I am here I would like to make a question. I understand that civil war can cause capital and consumer goods production to decrease, but I always thought that war was supposed to be good for the economy. Sure, there are going to be less people making things, but there is also going to be a higher demand for products, especially machinery. So couldn't a civil war also increase the production? Or is that only a war between nations?

KM said...

hmmm...to answer or not? To anwer or not? I'm curious what others think, and since there are a lot that haven't posted anything, I'm going to hold off until tomorrow to answer.

What do others think? I like the extra discussion, even with the lovely extra stress I pile on you. It will all be over in 4 short months. :)

I *do* still have Inspector Parker open. Crazy. I hate it when games get in your blood.

And I still have all those other things calling my name, too. Oh - that was on the other post. You may not know where my frazzled brain is going with this. It's time to get to bed.

Happy Econ reading!

Raveen said...

I have a couple questions on some of the material we've been covering. One is on the positive versus normative statements. I know that positive statements describe the world as it is, and normative statments describe how the world should be. Although, I still do not understand how this truly works in economics--an example would be quite helpful.

Raveen said...

My second question is about market intervention. How does effiency and equity contribute to market intervention?

KM said...

The positive/normative is basically realizing that when you take a look at statements, know what is fact versus opinion.

I could say that in the past the majority of my students have said it's easier to learn econ if they study chapters as we go along. That's a fact.

If I change that and say that I feel that every student learns best by studying along with the chapters as we go along, that's an opinion.

So - positive: If Oprah says to buy more books by Michael Crichton, demand for that book goes up.

Normative: I really liked "The Thirteenth Tale" by Diane Setterfield and I think everyone should read it. I'm doubting that would change the overall demand curve for that item.

Positive: Hyperinflation causes problems in an economy.

Normative: Hyperinflation is the worst thing an economy can face. (it makes a value judgment)

Positive: A business will usually make the highest profit when they produce at a point where their marginal costs equal their marginal revenue.

Normative: Umm...Most businesses won't bother to figure out profit points anyway, so who cares if marginal cost and marginal revenue are equal? (opinion)

hth
KM

Mary Hable said...

I'm a little confused on what we're supposed to be doing with these blogs...

rageena said...

So, Mrs. McDaniel... What is the most sucessful type of economy?

D Mac said...

Wojtek, in response to your question: i'm going to say that i think you can theoretically have a curve that bends towards the origin. it would just mean that decreasing the production of one good wouldn't effect the other until it hit a certain point, and then it would be reversed(effecting it a lot for every unit changed).

however, i'm also going to say that i doubt if there is any product like thisin reality an that any country producing a good like that probably wouldn't produce anywhere in the middle because it would be dumb to make both instead of make one and trading for the other.

rindmar said...

what exactly is the problem with ignoring secondary effects compared to primary effects?

KM said...

Because secondary effects can be just as damaging, it's not good to overlook them.

Using them *instead* of primary effects probably isn't a great idea, though - the secondarys are like the ripples...they could be no problem, or they could cause a lot of problems, but sometimes you just don't know what's going to happen with them.

So - for example. Let's see...umm...you choose not to study for the unit one test. Primary = you do poorly on the test. Secondary = your grade in class lowers, you don't understand a whole section on the AP national exam in May, you fail the national exam because one of the free response questions, you don't get college credit, you drop out of college because you just don't have enough credits...

well, maybe not. But those secondary effects can be murder.