231
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 36:
Line 36: − + + + Line 54:
Line 56: − +
First model answer
::::: I can also create some additional Coase theorem problems that present a scenario of pollution caused to a third party with a fourth party perhaps existing who can mitigate the pollution most efficiently. Also, I would like to ask some concept questions on what the Coase theorem is or what it implies and what it is not. Specifically, I would like to ask:
::::: I can also create some additional Coase theorem problems that present a scenario of pollution caused to a third party with a fourth party perhaps existing who can mitigate the pollution most efficiently. Also, I would like to ask some concept questions on what the Coase theorem is or what it implies and what it is not. Specifically, I would like to ask:
::::: "President Obama has articulated to the American people that a new program called [[cap and trade]] is a market-based way to combat pollution. Does the Coase theorem justify [[cap and trade]]? Why or why not?"
::::: "[[President Obama]] has articulated to the American people that a new program called [[cap and trade]] is a market-based way to combat pollution. Does the Coase theorem justify [[cap and trade]]? Why or why not?"
::::: ''No. The Coase theorem only states that the efficient outcome will be reached regardless of initial property allocation (or legal entitement) when there are zero transaction costs and when there is strong rule of law. Necessarily of course, these legal obligations can exist only between private parties who are then able to negotiate and bargain freely and in full faith. The Coase theorem does not state that the government can arbitrarily set a quota and simply expect that that level would be the optimum level. Under cap and trade, there is no legal way for private parties to exceed the government quota. For example, the cheapest method to deal with the negative effects of carbon emissions may be to plant trees or it may even be determined there is only a negligible effect on overall welfare. A cap, or quota, on emissions leaves private parties no legal recourse to explore these innovative methods of combatting pollution.''
::::: "Is the outcome generated after implementation of [[cap and trade]] optimal? Why or why not?"
::::: "Is the outcome generated after implementation of [[cap and trade]] optimal? Why or why not?"
::::: "What are the implications of the result of this problem in determining whether private charity or public assistance is better? Is there a situation where private charity be implemented while maintaining efficiency? What about public assistance?"
::::: "What are the implications of the result of this problem in determining whether private charity or public assistance is better? Is there a situation where private charity be implemented while maintaining efficiency? What about public assistance?"
::::: Hopefully, my clarification helps. Let me know what you think of these additional problems and if you have any questions. I'm pretty sure that any serious student of Conservapedia will get the correct answer on most, if not all of the follow up conceptual questions, though the rationale required may require critical thinking. [[User:Brown25|Brown25]] 18:52, 15 August 2009 (EDT)
::::: Hopefully, my clarification helps. Let me know what you think of these additional problems and if you have any questions. I'm pretty sure that any serious student of Conservapedia will get the correct answer on most, if not all, of the follow up conceptual questions, though the rationale required may require critical thinking. [[User:Brown25|Brown25]] 18:52, 15 August 2009 (EDT)