Log in
Economics
1
answer
0
watching
188
views

In 2004, oil facilities in Iraq were attacked and strong economies in the United States and China boosted the demand for oil.

a. Demonstrate graphically how these events led to increases in oil prices in June 2004. What was the effect on the equilibrium quantity of oil bought and sold?

b. As a result of political pressure, OPEC agreed to increase the daily quota by 2 million barrels a day. What was the likely effect on the equilibrium oil price and quantity? Demonstrate your answer graphically

Watch
1
answer
0
watching
188
views

For unlimited access to Homework Help, a Homework+ subscription is required.

Avatar image
Read by 1 person

Unlock all answers

Get 1 free homework help answer.
Already have an account? Log in
Share

Related textbook solutions

Principles of Economics
2nd Edition, 2017
Openstax
ISBN: 9781947172364
Principles of Macroeconomics
2 Edition,
Openstax
ISBN: 9781947172388
Principles of Microeconomics
2 Edition,
Openstax
ISBN: 9781947172340

Related questions

Question 6: Which of the following economic goals focuses on equal opportunities for education? (5 points)

-Equity

-Freedom

-Growth

-Security

Question 7: Marcel takes out student loans and works part-time to put himself through college. In time, he earns an advanced medical degree and goes to work in an understaffed city -hospital. Marcel's economic decisions benefit the goal of efficiency by (5 points)

-making his own job

-related decisions

-paying back loans to reduce the debt

-contributing to the nation's productivity

-taking advantage of equal opportunities

Question 8: Two countries produce milk and dairy products efficiently. Neither has an absolute advantage. However, Country A exports milk to Country B, and Country A imports cotton from Country B. Which of the following is inferred? (5 points)

-The opportunity cost of producing milk is lower for Country A.

-The opportunity cost of producing cotton is higher for Country B.

-Country A has a natural resource advantage in cotton.

-Country B has a natural resource advantage in milk.

Question 9: Worker hours to produce one unit of natural gas; Worker hours to produce one unit of oil; Brazil 4 9; Argentina 2 10; Mexico 3 7; United States 1 6. According to the chart, which country has the comparative advantage in oil production? (5 points)

-Brazil

-Mexico

-Argentina

-United States

Question 10: The United States can manufacture books at a much more rapid pace than manufacturers in Indonesia. Which of the following is a reason? (5 points)

-Indonesia, as a developed country, has a highly paid and experienced workforce

-Indonesia, as a developing country, has a less advanced manufacturing infrastructure

-The United States, as a developing country, has a high comparative advantage in manufacturing.

-The United States, as a developed country, has a lower cost of living than Indonesia

Question 11: A group of nations establishes a free-trade zone. What is the most likely effect? (5 points)

-Cost of trade increases

-Exports decrease

-Imports decrease

-Trade increases

Question 12: The United States may have a tariff on cotton products from China in order to (5 points)

-prevent Chinese manufacturers from losing profit because of low prices

-protect the business of the American cotton growers and manufacturers

-stop trade due to political disagreement on economic policy

-promote sales in the United States of cotton products from China

Question 13: A Chinese international salesperson hoping to increase exports to the U.S. may worry about the inflation of the U.S. dollar because the inflation may (5 points)

-increase the United States' supply of Chinese products

-decrease tariffs on Chinese products sold to the United States

-increase taxes on the United States' products sold to China

-reduce the United States' demand for Chinese products

Question 14: How would a strong U.S. dollar impact the trade of grain produced in the United States? (5 points)

-U.S. grain exports decrease

-U.S. grain exports increase

-U.S. grain imports decrease

-U.S. grain imports stagnate

Question 15: Which of these can be a result of inflation? (5 points)

-Businesses grow cautious about spending

-The government has to cut spending

-The price of household items increases

-Workers benefit from a lower cost of living

Question 16: If the inflation rate increases faster than their income, people will most likely (5 points)

-use a higher proportion of their incomes on basic needs

-spend a lower proportion of their incomes on basic needs

-get more goods and services for less money

-obtain fewer goods and services for less money

Question 17: To increase your standard of living, your wages must (5 points)

-rise faster than the inflation rate

-rise more slowly than the inflation rate

-keep pace with the inflation rate

-have a negative inflation rate

Question 18: Look at the map showing the European Union (EU) and its free-trade agreement (FTA) countries. Which is true about most current EU free-trade agreements? (5 points)

-The European Union's free-trade agreements are with all of the most developed nations in the world.

-The European Union's free-trade agreements include agreements with both developed and developing nations.

-The European Union's free-trade agreements focus on nations with access to overland trade routes

-The European Union's free-trade agreements focus on the Southern Hemisphere, as distant countries have access to goods not grown in Europe.

*Article*

The U.S. economy is revving up just as Europe and other major economies lose steam, jeopardizing a rare period in which the world’s largest economies have been accelerating in unison.

The European Central Bank on Thursday took another step toward ending the massive stimulus measures it has used in an effort to boost growth since 2015. But ECB officials also said they would hold interest rates steady through summer next year, a sign that they felt the eurozone economy remains fragile.

In an indication of growing economic vigor in the U.S., the Federal Reserve on Wednesday tapped the brakes again, raising the benchmark interest rate by a quarter of a percentage point and signaling it may quicken the pace of future rate increases because of a strengthening economy and tightening labor markets.

The economies’ diverging paths were expressed most prominently in the euro, which on Thursday suffered its worst day against the dollar in two years. The euro lost 1.88% against the U.S. currency, its biggest drop since the day after the U.K. voted to leave the European Union.

The central bank announcements over the past two days offered the latest evidence that heady growth expectations for Europe and other major economies outside the U.S. might not be achieved, defying analysts who began the year convinced that the world economy’s first synchronized expansion in years would continue.

The International Monetary Fund said in January that the world’s seven largest economies each grew more than 1.5% in 2017, and it predicted more solid growth this year. Global manufacturing was booming and the IHS Markit global purchasing managers index that month was its strongest in nearly seven years.

Many investors counted on a revitalized Europe to lead that growth in 2018. But recent labor strikes in France, political turmoil in Italy and softer economic data are causing investors to rethink that premise. Germany last week reported that factory orders dropped 2.5% in April, while eurozone growth was 0.4% in the first quarter, down from 0.7% in the final quarter of 2017. On Thursday, the ECB revised down its eurozone growth expectations for this year to 2.1%, from 2.4%.

“When we look at Europe, the very strong momentum we saw in data last year has been waning this year,” said Holly MacDonald, chief investment strategist at Bessemer Trust.

Europe isn’t the only region to show signs of cooling down. The People’s Bank of China this week also left a suite of key short-term interest rates unchanged. New data showed business activity, including investment and retail sales, slowed in May, suggesting the world’s second-largest economy is facing growing headwinds.

The disappointing figures “warranted China to take a cautious tone,” said Tommy Xie, an economist at OCBC Bank.

In the U.S., meanwhile, recent data suggest an economic expansion that just became the second-longest in the nation’s history is accelerating, rather than slowing down.

The U.S. economy grew modestly over the winter—at a 2.2% annual rate in January through March—but seems to be ramping up further this spring. Growth is on track to exceed a 4% pace in the three months ending in June, which would be the fastest of any quarter in almost four years.

Spending at U.S. retailers soared 0.8% in May, the biggest jump in six months, according to U.S. government data released on Thursday. Consumers, spurred by tax cuts and the lowest unemployment in half a century, shelled out more for cars, clothing, building supplies, health products and bar tabs.

“We may be entering a new level of consumer spending right now,” said economist Robert Frick of the Navy Federal Credit Union. He pointed out that more and more blue-collar workers are finding work as the labor expansion endures, and those workers tend to spend a greater portion of their incomes, out of necessity, than higher-income workers, who save more.

He added that low unemployment, strong consumer spending and modest inflation are likely to keep the economy on strong footing this year: “We’re in a Goldilocks zone right now.”

In the eurozone, rates have stayed pegged at negative levels—now at minus 0.4%—since 2014. Despite some initial concerns, investors have become more relaxed about possible unintended effects of negative rates on the economy.

On Thursday, investors reacted to the ECB’s announcement to end bond purchases while keeping rates low longer by selling the euro and bidding up stocks. It is the latest example of interest-rate moves returning to the driver’s seat of monetary policy. In the wake of the financial crisis, central bankers rolled out a raft of unprecedented and complex measures, including bond buying and lending facilities for banks, pitching them as a way to lower long-term borrowing costs at a time when short-term rates could go no lower.

Not all investors are ready to write off Europe’s growth prospects. Roland Kaloyan, head of European equity strategy at ?Société Générale, believes that lackluster economic data in the first quarter is a “temporary soft patch,” and that “fundamentals remain very solid for eurozone growth,” whereas he expects the U.S. economy to go into a recession around 2020.

Others believe the euro will continue to weaken further this year, but think that markets are swinging too far in favor of U.S. growth.

Next year, “we expect the euro to rebound against the dollar even if the ECB only hikes late in the year,” said Ingvild Borgen Gjerde, an analyst at Capital Economics. “We think the Fed’s tightening cycle will come to an end in mid-2019, far sooner than is discounted in the markets.”

*question*

4. Should a goal of monetary policymakers be to raise the value of its currency? How would a currency appreciate both help and hurt an economy? If a central bank wants to appreciate its currency, how in practice would it do so?

Adapted from Bayer-Monsanto: the challenges of a Mega-merger. Case #9B17M182 and Teaching Note #8B17M182 Ivey Publishing

In 2016, the German multinational Bayer AG and the U.S.-based Monsanto Company agreed to merge, potentially creating the world's largest integrated pesticide and seeds company.

The agrochemicals and pharmaceuticals industries have several attributes in common. Both have large markets and high growth potential. Both industries also have strong technological roots in chemistry and biology. Too, the R&D intensity is high in both industries. Monsanto, for example, spends over 10% of its revenues on R&D whereas the average pharmaceutical firm spends 13%. Both industries are also subject to strict government regulation. For example, safety reviews of new products are commonplace in pharmaceuticals while genetically modified organisms are forbidden in Europe.

Nevertheless, there were some differences. For example, while the pharmaceutical industry is rather fragmented, agrochemicals were not - 6 companies controlled 2/3 of the seed business and 3/4 of the pesticide market. Moreover, the pharmaceutical industry is characterized by long product life cycles (e.g., 12 years) and heavy up-front investments in R&D to discover new products. To compound this risk, Bayer had a relatively limited portfolio in pharmaceuticals (15 products accounted for 80% of its 2015 pharmaceutical revenues).

Table 1: Revenue Distribution of Pharmaceutical companies in 2015, millions of Euros

Company

Pharmaceutical Revenues

Other Revenues

GlaxoSmithKline

21.4

14.6

AstraZeneca

34.0

0.0

Sanofi

29.8

4.7

Merck

32.2

3.4

Pfizer

44.0

0.0

Novartis

27.4

17.1

Roche

35.3

9.8

Bayer

12.6

29.8*

Johnson & Johnson

28.3

34.8

*9.1M Consumer health, 10.4M Crop Science, 12.0M Polymers, Coatings, and Adhesives. Source: Bayer 2015 annual report

Other factors favored the merger. For example, while Monsanto had a strong presence in America (53% of its sales), Bayer's geographical presence was stronger in Europe. Too, it was anticipated that knowledge from Bayer's pharmaceuticals and crop science research could be shared across Monsanto's animal health business. Both sides also anticipated additional benefits from the overlap in customers farmers - and from bundling seeds and pesticides in an exclusive package. Also, though Bayer had traditionally been weak in seeds they represented only 12% of crop science division sales - Monsanto's expertise in this area was thought to be a good complement. In fact, Monsanto's seeds had been engineered to be resistant to its Roundup herbicide. Furthermore, Bayer's new CEO, Werner Baumann, had previously managed the strategy and portfolio department at Bayer and, consequently, had a good deal of M&A experience. And finally, both companies were focusing on big data” to provide new services and more precision for farmers. The possibility of a huge data bank created by the convergence of the data from both sides promised further productivity improvements.

Nevertheless, although agrochemicals could be considered an oligarchic industry dominated by firms such as DuPont, Syngenta, Monsanto, and Bayer, even the leading players had been struggling recently with a new wave of mergers and acquisitions. For example, after Monsanto had made three unsuccessful attempts to acquire Syngenta in 2014-2015, Dow and Dupont merged in December 2015 and Syngenta merged with ChemChina in February 2016.

Table 2: 2015 Revenues by business segment, $B
 

Crop protection & seeds

Other

Other divisions

DuPont

9.8

15.2

Electronics (2.1B), Ind'l. Biosciences (1.1B), Nutrition & Health (3.2B), Perf. Materials (5.3B), Safety & Protection (3.5B)

Dow

7.3

50.5

Perf. Plastics (22.4B), Perf. Mat'ls and Chem. (15.1), Infrastructure Solns. (8.4), Customer Solutions (4.6)

Syngenta

13.0

0.0

  

Chem China

n.a

n.a.

Agrochemicals, Basic Chemicals, Specialty Chemicals, Tire & Rubber, Chemical Equipment, Oil Processing

Monsanto

15.0

0.0

  

Sources: 2015 Annual Reports

Furthermore, Bayer and Monsanto would need to obtain approval from regulators in over 30 countries to close the deal. U.S. regulators had opposed the merger but the ascension of Donald Trump to the presidency (he argued that agriculture had needed more innovation) boded well for approval of the combination in the U.S. The European Union, on the other hand, had opposed Monsanto, especially its genetically-modified organisms (GMO).

Diana L. Moss, president of the American Antitrust Institute, also pointed out that

The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) notes that the price of farm inputs, led by crop seed, generally have risen faster over the last twenty years than the prices farmers have received for their commodities. Moreover, seed prices have outpaced yield increases over time. And finally, the USDA has determined that increasing levels of concentration in agricultural input markets (including crop seeds) are no longer generally associated with higher R&D or a permanent rise in R&D intensity.

Therefore, we might conclude that this consolidation would negatively pressure consumers and farmers.

Questions:

The preceding discussion documents Bayer's attempt to further diversify its portfolio of businesses.

1. What weaknesses were Bayer trying to address via its diversification strategy?

2. What opportunities in its environment (e.g., synergies created by merging with Monsanto) is Bayer trying to exploit via its diversification strategy? Is this a case of related or unrelated product/market diversification?

3. Finally, according to the resource-based view, firms may differ in the number of synergies they possess vis-a-vis target firms. Those with greater synergies may be able to profit more from the acquisition than their competitors. They may either (1) win the bid at a lower price, thereby earning above-normal profits, or (2) withdraw from the bidding if the target price becomes too high, allowing the winning bidder to earn below-normal profits.

What attributes does Bayer bring to the bidding for Monsanto that suggests it might have had different (possibly more) synergies with Monsanto than other potential bidders (e.g., Dow or ChemChina)?

Weekly leaderboard

Home
Homework Help 3,900,000
Economics 400,000
Start filling in the gaps now
Log in