La descarga está en progreso. Por favor, espere

# Intermezzo! Respuestas

## Presentación del tema: "Intermezzo! Respuestas"— Transcripción de la presentación:

Intermezzo! Análisis de una Externalidad Positiva
10 20 30 40 50 P Q \$ Mercado de Vacunas Beneficio Externo = \$10/ vacuna Dibuje la curva de valor social. Encuentre la Q socialmente óptima. ¿Qué política internalizaría esta externalidad? S D

Intermezzo! Respuestas
10 20 30 40 50 P Q \$ Q socialmente óptima = 25 vacunas Para internalizar la externalidad, use un subsidio = \$10/ vacuna. Mercado de Vacunas Beneficio Externo S 25 Valor Social = Valor Privado + Beneficio Externo D 1

Intermezzo! Para pensar
Colectivamente, los 1000 residentes de Green Valley valoran nadar en el Lago Blue Lake en \$100,000. Una fábrica cercana contamina las aguas del lago, y tendría que pagar \$50,000 por un equipo anticontaminante si deseara dejar de contaminar. A. Describa una solución privada tipo Coase. B. ¿Puede imaginarse alguna razón por la cual esta solución no funcionaría en el mundo real? Have students work together – in small groups, or as a class (with you as moderator). If working in groups, allow 5 minutes, then solicit responses from the class. If you wish, insert a blank slide after this one and use it to type students’ responses as they share them. Most students should find part A very straight-forward. A good Coasian solution would be for each of the 1000 residents to chip in \$75, so the town can offer \$75,000 to the factory to stop polluting. The second part involves brainstorming: students try to come up with a list of reasons why it might be difficult to implement Coase-like solutions in the real world. Brainstorming engages students and is shown to increase learning outcomes and student satisfaction. And it provides a break from what otherwise would be a long stretch of lecture. I have not provided a slide with answers. Instead, the following slide lists the reasons why private solutions don’t always work, and the “notes” section (what you’re reading right now) gives some examples of each in the context of this scenario. 2

Intermezzo! Preguntas para Discusión
Meta de Política: Reducir el consumo de Gasolina Dos métodos: A. Establecer regulaciones que obliguen a los productores de autos a producir vehículos más eficientes B. Subir significativamente el Impuesto a la Gasolina This discussion question is inspired by a new “In the News” box in the fourth edition of the textbook, which contains a New York Times article entitled “A Fuel-Saving Proposal from Your Automaker: Tax the Gas.” Key points: 1. If consumers demand gas-guzzling SUVs instead of fuel-efficient compact sedans, then forcing automakers to produce more of the latter will not be the best way to achieve the goal. 2. Raising the gas tax would shift consumer demand toward more fuel-efficient vehicles, and self-interested automakers would respond by producing more fuel-efficient vehicles. 3. The U.S. cannot impose mileage restrictions on foreign automakers. It can, however, restrict imports of foreign vehicles deemed inefficient. But this would risk WTO sanctions or retaliatory trade restrictions on goods produced in the U.S. 4. People who drive more than average are likely to prefer A to B. It might not be cost-effective for average Joes to organize, we could likely expect the trucking industry to lobby members of Congress to support option A and oppose option B. 5. Many environmentalists would likely support B, but would likely oppose the end of regulations on automakers. Discuta los méritos de cada método. ¿Cuál cree usted que lograría la meta con un costo más bajo? ¿Quién piensa que se opondrá, o favorecerá, cada medida? 3