Chapter 7: Problem 11
"If a firm has diminishing returns to labor over some range of output, it cannot have economies of scale over that range." True or false? Explain briefly.
Chapter 7: Problem 11
"If a firm has diminishing returns to labor over some range of output, it cannot have economies of scale over that range." True or false? Explain briefly.
All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.
Get started for freeThe following table shows total output (in tax returns completed per day) of the accounting firm of Hoodwink and Finagle: $$\begin{array}{cc}\text { Number of } & \text { Number of Returns } \\\\\text { Accountants } & \text { per Day } \\\\\hline 0 & 0 \\\1 & 5 \\\2 & 12 \\\3 & 17 \\\4 & 20 \\\5 & 22\end{array}$$ Assuming the quantity of capital (computers, adding machines, desks, etc.) remains constant at all output levels: a. Calculate the marginal product of each accountant. b. Over what range of employment do you see increasing returns to labor? Diminishing returns? c. Explain why \(M P L\) might behave this way in the context of an accounting firm.
In mid-2009, the Obama administration announced it would cancel orders for a new fleet of presidential helicopters. About \(\$ 3\) billion had already been spent on developing the helicopters, which had special protective and telecommunications features. But another \(\$ 8\) billion would have been needed to complete the project and deliver the fleet. The administration suggested it might look for a less expensive design and start from scratch. Some media commentators criticized the decision, arguing that cancelling the project would mean wasting the \(\$ 3\) billion already spent. a. Suppose that starting from scratch on a new proposal that would be just as good as the original would cost a total of \(\$ 5\) billion from beginning to end. Which would be the wiser choice sticking with the original or starting from scratch? Why? b. Would your answer change if the new proposal would cost a total of \(\$ 10\) billion? Why or why not?
Draw the long-run total cost and long-run average cost curves for a firm that experiences: a. Constant returns to scale over all output levels. b. Diseconomies of scale over low levels of output, constant returns to scale over intermediate levels of output, and economies of scale over high output levels. Does this pattern of costs make sense? Why or why not?
A study \(^{*}\) of immunizing children in poor countries against diphtheria, pertussis, and tetanus estimated that, in the long run, a \(10 \%\) increase in the number of children vaccinated increases the total cost of vaccinations by \(8.4 \% .\) According to this study: a. Is immunization over this range characterized by economies of scale, constant returns to scale, or diseconomies of scale? b. [more difficult] We can define long-run marginal cost (LRMC) as the cost of increasing output by one unit when all inputs can be varied (as they can be in the long run). Based on the study, at current vaccine levels, would LRMC for vaccinations be greater than, less than, or equal to long-run average total cost (LRATC)? Why? c. If we want to know what it will cost to vaccinate additional children, and we use "cost per vaccine" as given by the current LRATC, do we overestimate, underestimate, or accurately estimate the cost per additional vaccine?
In a recent year, a long, hard winter gave rise to stronger-than-normal demand for heating oil. The following summer was characterized by strong demand for gasoline by vacationers. Show what these two events might have done to the short-run \(M C, A V C\), and \(A T C\) curves of Continental Airlines. (Hint: How would these events affect the price of oil?)
What do you think about this solution?
We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.