ECON 1B03 Lecture Notes - Lecture 11: Coase Theorem, List Of Universities In Canada, Externality

20 views2 pages

erincat447

10 Jun 2018

School

Department

Course

Professor

For unlimited access to Class Notes, a Class+ subscription is required.

Externalities II

Positive Externalities

- Beefits ho go to people ho did’t partiipate i the arket trasatio

- Cosider a uiersity eduatio…

- Education benefits not only those who go to school; all of society benefits by having an

educated, more productive population

- The value of education to everyone, Marginal Social Benefit, is greater than just the private

benefit to those who receive education

- At Qe too little is produced

- We should be producing Q*

- If we are producing less than what the real equilibrium should be we get a DWL

- The government can internalize the externality by subsidizing the production of the good – get

firms to supply more

- In the case of education, the government does in fact subsidize Canadian universities so that

more programs and more facilities are available to accommodate even more students

Government

- Government action is not always necessary for positive or negative externalities

- The private sector can sometimes solve the problems of externalities on its own

- Examples include:

o Moral codes and sanctions (like boycotting pollution companies)

o Charities (like Greenpeace who protect whales)

o Contracts between parties

The Coase Theorem

- This is a proposition that if private parties can bargain without cost (or with very little cost)

over the allocation of resources, they can solve the externalities problems on their own (no

government intervention)

- However, property rights have to be well defined for bargaining work

- A property right: the exclusive right to determine how a resource is used, whether that resource

is owned by government or by individuals

find more resources at oneclass.com

Unlock document

This preview shows half of the first page of the document.
Unlock all 2 pages and 3 million more documents.

Already have an account? Log in

Shanghaibalcony1234 and 37744 others unlocked

ECON 1B03 Full Course Notes

Verified Note

46 documents

Document Summary

Be(cid:374)efits (cid:449)ho go to people (cid:449)ho did(cid:374)"t parti(cid:272)ipate i(cid:374) the (cid:373)arket tra(cid:374)sa(cid:272)tio(cid:374) Education benefits not only those who go to school; all of society benefits by having an educated, more productive population. The value of education to everyone, marginal social benefit, is greater than just the private benefit to those who receive education. If we are producing less than what the real equilibrium should be we get a dwl. The government can internalize the externality by subsidizing the production of the good get firms to supply more. In the case of education, the government does in fact subsidize canadian universities so that more programs and more facilities are available to accommodate even more students. Government action is not always necessary for positive or negative externalities. The private sector can sometimes solve the problems of externalities on its own. Examples include: moral codes and sanctions (like boycotting pollution companies, charities (like greenpeace who protect whales, contracts between parties.

Related Questions

. Vouchers to Pay Private School
Tuition
Two conditions that justify government intervention in a market are the presence of external benefits and equity concerns. Both of these issues are present in the case of primary and secondary education in the United States. Think about what education without government education would look like. In the absence of government intervention, all primary and secondary education in the US would be private. Public school districts would not exist. Parents would need to pay private firms (schools) to educate their children.

External benefits

If all education were private, itâs likely that people would buy too little education, from societyâs point of view. External benefits are one reason. When a child is educated, he or she benefits and we expect his or her parents to take those benefits into account when they purchase education. But there are additional benefits to society which parents may ignore. As people become more educated, they are less likely to be unemployed or be criminals and are more likely to volunteer and vote. The presence of these external benefits is an example in support for the government getting involved in education.

Equity

Many families in the United States have low incomes. Among all children in first through twelfth grades in 2001, 46% were from families with incomes below $40,000. Since the cost of private education would be an important share of these familiesâ incomes, most Americans would be concerned about the fairness of relying on markets to decide how much education children receive. Current spending by these families on private education provides some support for this concern. Of all children in private school in 2001, only 25% were from families with incomes below $40,000. Therefore, equity concerns are another example in support for government getting involved in education.

Providing vs. producing education

Most economists think external benefits and equity concerns justify government intervention in education. But it is important to distinguish between government production of education and other forms of government intervention. At the level of elementary and secondary education, K- 12 education, government intervention today mostly means production of education by local school districts. To benefit, children must attend public schools. But this is not the only form intervention could take.
There are other markets where government intervention takes the form of subsidizing peopleâs access to productsâthink of financial aid to college students, for example. Many people in the US think that government should move from producing education to subsidizing access.

One form that subsidy could take is government providing vouchers to parents. Parents would use the voucher to help pay for their childâs education in a private school. After it receives the voucher, the school would turn it in and be paid by a local or state government.

Today there is a lively debate between people who think K-12 education should be delivered publicly and people who think quality and efficiency would be higher if government provided vouchers and the education was delivered by private schools. Some of these quality and efficiency arguments can be based on material we covered this week. Price competition between private schools will pressure each one to produce efficiently. Competition for students will lead private schools to offer programs of interest to parents and their children.

Answer the questions below and make use of the sources supplied. Be sure to cite you sources in your answers.

1. Explain whether a potential exit by students with vouchers will lead to the improvement of public schools. 2. Discuss whether the implementation of vouchers will lead the best students to leave public school, which could lead to a decline in education for the students left behind in the public schools. 3. Consider what might happen to the students who use vouchers to leave public schools in order to attend private schools. How might their academic performance change as a result of switching? 4. Finally, think about the impact of a voucher system on the students in an urban setting. Describe whether all families would have an equal opportunity to access education.

Your final product will be a paper that: ? Addresses each of the four questions above in total. ? Is APA formatted. ? The body is to be 2 pages minimum.

The requirements for your assignment are: 1. Answer each question fully 2. Define the overall subject of each question. 3. Cite at least three (3) resources from this weekâs materials.

The opportunity cost of going to college is almost never discussed, yet it is quite high, so high that it is seriously impacting the broader American economy. For non-economists, âopportunity costâ is one of the most important concepts in economics. Because of scarcity we only have limited resources, and when we use those resources to do something like go to college, we cannot use them for other things that we also believe are desirable.

By far the most important resource we use in producing goods and services is labor or âhuman capital.â Based on what we pay owners of resources, we can say that roughly two-thirds of all production of goods and services is attributable to direct human effort â work. When kids go to college, they forego entering the labor force in a major, full-time manner. When six or seven percent of the entire American population is in college, that means a significant reduction in work effort occurs because otherwise highly productive persons in the physical prime of their lives are only lightly utilized in making things or providing services.

Today, only slightly over 59 of every 100 Americans of working age actually work, down from almost 66 in 2000. If we had the employment-population ratio of 15 years ago, we would have at least 16 million more working Americans today â an increase of over 10 percent. Our output would be probably the better part of a trillion dollars higher. The push for âcollege for allâ is one reason we have less work effort today (to be sure, the modern welfare state has also lowered work incentives a lot for other reasons).

The college for all crowd says higher education augments oneâs human capital, and we forego output today from working to bolster output tomorrow from more productive workers. And, no doubt, that is sometimes true. We have many productive engineers and accountants who gained important skills in college, for example. But is that necessarily true of all college graduates, particularly when Arum and Roksa tell us that graduating college seniors typically have only marginally better critical reasoning skills that freshman? And when over 40 percent of those entering four year colleges fail to graduate in six years? What if millions of those who do graduate take jobs similar to those without that college education? What if the debt incurred to pay for the college leads many to delay marrying, delay buying houses? There is evidence that to some extent the push for college has led to all of these unintended consequences.

The Federal Reserve Bank of New York has published great work showing that there is a very severe underemployment problem amongst college graduates, and other equally good research demonstrating what many of us have been saying for years: the student financial aid programs such as subsidized student loans, have pushed up the cost of college. Now a sister Federal Reserve Bank, namely Philadelphia, is jumping into the act.

The Philly Fed in a new study shows that high student loan debt is preventing young potential entrepreneurs from starting new businesses â they cannot afford the necessary debt. Opportunity cost again: if I borrow a lot to go to college, I cannot afford to borrow to start a business.

Enrollment in all forms of higher education today are up roughly 50 percent or seven million from what they were in 1990. What if enrollments had only risen proportionate to population growth â we would have three or four million fewer enrolled in college today. Would our nation be better or worse off? No one knows for sure, but the continued rise in the proportion of Americans with a college education has been accompanied by a sharp reduction in the rate of economic growth. I bet we would have fewer underemployed recent graduates. I bet we would have less than 17 percent delinquency rates on college loans, and far less than a trillion dollars in loan debt. I bet we would have a higher rate of labor force involvement and entrepreneurial activity among the young. And I bet we would be spending tens of billions less on higher education, and at least a little bit more on capital goods investment, highway construction, et cetera. In short, I suspect we would have been better off as a nation.

Richard Vedder directs the Center for College Affordability and Productivity, teaches at Ohio University, and is an Adjunct Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute.

Question :

This is a short article discussing the concept of opportunity cost and college. Provide your views on this topic.Do you agree/disagree with the article? Why? What are your thoughts on the current employment landscape of college graduates? Provide any insight on this topic on a specific industry, your own experience, or the experiences of people that you know who have already graduated.

magentalion418

Grade inflation Gone Wild - sTUarTrojsTaCzer

A bout six years ago, I was sitting in the student union of a small liberal arts college when I saw a graph on the cover of the student newspaper that showed the history of grades given at that institution in the past 30 years.

Grades were up. Way up.

I am a scientist by training and I love numbers. So when I looked at that graph, I wondered, How many colleges and universities have
data like this that I can find? The answer is that a lot of schools have data like this hidden somewhere. Back then, I found more than 80 colleges and universities with data on grades, mostly by poking around the Web. Then I created a website (gradeinflation.com) so that others could find this data. I learned that grades started to shoot up nationwide in the 1960s, levelled off in the 1970s, and then started rising again in the 1980s. Private schools had much higher grades than public schools, but virtually everyone was experiencing grade inflation.

What about today?

Grades continue to go up regardless of the quality of education. At a time when many are raising questions about the quality of U.S. higher education, the average GPA at public schools is 3.0, with many flagship state schools having average GPAs higher than 3.2. At a private college, the average is now 3.3. At some schools, it tops 3.5 and even 3.6. A is average at those schools! At elite Brown University, two-thirds of all letter grades given are now A's.

These changes in grading have had a profound influence on college life and learning. When students walk into a classroom knowing that they can go through the motions and get a B+ or better, that's what they tend to do, give minimal effort. Our college classrooms are filled with students who do not prepare for class. Many studies less than 10 hours a week that's less than half the hours they spent studying 40 years ago. Paradoxically, students are spending more and more money on an education that seems to deliver less and less content.
With so few hours filled with learning, boredom sets in and students have to find something to pass the time. Instead of learning, they drink. A recent survey of more than 30,000 first-year students across the country showed that nearly half were spending more hours drinking than they were studying. If we continue along this path, well end up with a generation of poorly educated college graduates who have used their four years principally to develop an addiction to alcohol.

Many say that grade inflation is a complicated issue with no easy fix. But there are solutions. At about the same time that I started to collect data on rising grades, Princeton University began to do something about its grade-inflation problem. Its guidelines have the effect of now limiting A's on average to 35 per cent of students in a class. Those guidelines have worked. Grades are going back down at Princeton and academic rigour is making a comeback. A similar successful effort has taken place at Wellesley College in Massachusetts. And through a concerted effort on the part of faculty and leadership, grades at Reed College in Oregon have stayed essentially constant for 20 years.

Princeton, Wellesley, and Reed provide evidence that the effort to keep grade inflation in check is not impossible. This effort takes two major steps. First, school officials must admit that there is a problem. Then they must implement policies or guidelines that truly restore excellence.

I asked Dean Nancy Malkiel at Princeton why so few schools seem to be following Princeton's lead. Because its hard work, she answered. Because you have to persuade the faculty that its important to do the work.

Making a switch will take hard work, but the effort is worthwhile. The alternative is a student body that barely studies and drinks out of boredom. That's not acceptable. Colleges and universities must roll up their sleeves, bring down inflated grades, and encourage real learning. It's not an impossible task. There are successful examples that can be followed. I am looking forward to the day when we can return to being proud of the education that our nation's colleges and universities provide.

Analyze Stuart Rojstaczer's argument in Grade Inflation Gone Wild, addressing the following questions:
What evidence does Rojstaczer use to indicate that there is a problem?
How would you characterize this evidence (for example, scientific, anecdotal), and to what extent are you persuaded by the evidence he provides to suggest that grade inflation has a profound effect on life and learning?
To what extent does he persuade you that a change in policy is
necessary or that such a change would make a difference?

goldporcupine700

ECON 1B03 Lecture Notes - Lecture 11: Coase Theorem, List Of Universities In Canada, Externality

ECON 1B03 Full Course Notes

Document Summary

Get access

Related Documents

ECON 1B03 Lecture 1: ECON 1B03- Week 7 Module 4

ECON 1B03 Lecture Notes - Lecture 12: Coase Theorem, List Of Universities In Canada, Externality

ECON 1B03 Lecture Notes - Lecture 12: Deadweight Loss, Social Cost, Externality

Related Questions