Log in
Economics
1
answer
0
watching
272
views

The costs of attending a state college for one year are $2,000 for tuition, $1,500 for the room, $1,000 for meals, and $500 for books and supplies. As an alternative, the student could earn $13,000 by getting a job instead of going to college and, in addition, earn 8 percent interest by saving the money not spent on attending college. Calculate a) the explicit costs b) the implicit costs c) the total economic costs that the student faces by attending college for one year.

 

Watch
1
answer
0
watching
272
views

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

Romarie Khazandra Marijuan
Romarie Khazandra MarijuanLv10
28 Sep 2019

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

1. Scarcity in economics means: we do not have sufficient resources to produce all the goods and services we want. the wants of people are limited. there must be poor people in rich countries. shortages exist in nearly all markets. You like to read Vogue and Sports Illustrated. You have only $5 to spend, so you only buy Sports Illustrated. The statement that best represents this economic concept is: resources are scarce. the real cost of something is what you must give up to get it. positive economics explains how the economy actually works. economic models are used to answer “what if” questions. . If the state government allocates additional spending on education, the opportunity cost is: zero. the dollar amount of the additional spending. considered only if additional taxes need to be raised to fund the spending. measured in terms of the best alternative use for that money. For a student that owns his or her own home and doesn't plan to live in the dorm the cost of going to college is: tuition and the cost of housing. tuition, the cost of housing, and the cost of books. tuition, the cost of books, and forgone income. forgone income only. Keynesian economics stressed: the importance of total spending. the self-correcting power of free markets. the long run. that the Depression should run its course to bring down the high cost of living. The economic policy that uses changes in government spending and taxes to affect the overall spending in the economy is known as: a tax-and-spend policy. monetary policy. fiscal policy. free-trade policy. When building a model, economists: simplify reality in order to highlight what really matters. attempt to duplicate reality in all of its complexity. ignore the facts and instead try to determine what the facts should be. are careful to avoid the scientific method. Which is a normative statement? The minimum wage has not kept pace with inflation. The minimum wage is an important tool in fighting poverty and should be increased. The minimum wage can create higher unemployment for teens and unskilled workers. A higher minimum wage is expected to increase the price of a fast-food cheeseburger. Which is an example of a positive statement? The poverty rate should be 4%. A high rate of economic growth is a more important economic goal than a low rate of unemployment. The federal government pays for 46% of U.S. health care costs. Everyone in the country should be covered by national health insurance. Economists may disagree about policies because they: may approach the issue using the same sets of values. may use different economic models. enjoy disagreeing with each other. only consider issues in positive economics.

1.) Suppose that Joe enjoys and repeatedly does stupid things like getting heavily into debt and insulting police officers. Do these actions constitute systematic errors? If he gets what he wants each time, are his stupid actions even considered to be errors by economists? Explain.

2.) Why do behavioral economists consider it helpful to base a theory of economic behavior on the actual mental processes that people use to make decisions? Why do neoclassical economists not care about whether a theory incorporates those actual mental processes?

10.) What does behavioral economics have to say about each of the following statements?

a.) "Nobody is truly charitable--they just give money to show off."

b.) "America has a ruthless capitalist system. Considerations of fairness are totally ignored."

c.) "Selfish people always get ahead. It's like nobody even notices!"

__________________________________________________________________

1.) One type of systematic error arises because people tend to think of benefits in percentage terms rather than in absolute dollar amounts. As an example, Samir is willing to drive 20 minutes out of his way to save $4 on a grocery item that costs $10 at a local market. But he is unwilling to drive 20 minutes out of his way to save $10 on a laptop that costs $400 at a local store. In percentage terms, how big is the saving on the grocery item? On the laptop? In absolute terms, how big is the savings on the grocery item? On the laptop? If Samir is willing to sacrifice 20 minutes of his time to save $4 in one case, shouldn't he also be willing to sacrifice 20 minutes of his time to save $10?

4.) Angela owes $500 on a credit card and $2,000 on a student loan. The credit card has a 15 percent annual interest rate and the student loan has a 7 percent annual interest rate. Her sense of loss aversion makes her more anxious about the larger loan. As a result, she plans to pay it off first--depsite the fact that professional financial advisors always tell people to pay off their highest-interest-rate loans first. Suppose Angela has only $500 at the present time to help pay down her loans and that this $500 will be the only money she will have for making debt payments for at least the next year. If she uses the $500 to pay off the credit card, how much interest will accrue on the other loan over the coming year? On the other hand, if she uses the $500 to pay off part of the student loan, how much in combined interest will she owe over the next year on the remaining balances on the two loans? By how many dollars will she be better off if she uses the $500 to completely pay off the credit card rather than partly paying down the student loan? (HInt: If you owe X dollars at an annual interest rate of Y percent, your annual interest payment will be X * Y, where the interest rate Y is expressed as a decimal.)

WRITE a one-sentence summary of each paragraph!

The False Income-Inequality Narrative

BY JASON L. RILEY

Published in the Wall Street Journal on Sept. 29, 2015

An enduring theme of the Democratic presidential race has been income inequality, coupled with an enduring belief that America's affluent reached their status at the expense of the poor and the middle class.

Bernie Sanders speaks of little else on the stump. And when not busy dissembling on her handling of email correspondence at the State Department, Hillary Clinton will tell you that the deck is still stacked in favor of those at the top. If Joe Biden gets in, expect more of the same. The vice president is said to be contemplating a 2016 bid in large part because struggling middle-income families may have trouble relating to Mrs. Clinton on inequality given her high living since leaving the White House.

This theme, in any case, seems to resonate with voters, which is no huge shock in the sixth year of an economic recovery. Envy and resentment fuel class warfare and lackluster economic growth throughout the Obama presidency have made people less optimistic and more inclined to fault others for their circumstances. A Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll this week reports that four-in-five Americans “were either angry because our political system seems to only be working for the insiders with money and power or anxious and uncertain. After all, the economy still feels rocky and unpredictable or both.

Liberals want to address income disparities through wealth redistribution by taking money from more productive people and giving it to the less productive in the name of fairness as the left defines it. They want to raise income taxes, expand the welfare state, lift minimum wages, and strengthen the bargaining power of unions. Mr. Sanders has been the most explicit about this, even going so far as to propose a wealth tax. Our economic goals have to be redistributing a significant amount of [wealth] back from the top 1%, the senator said in July.

In reality, the left has overstated the problem. And all the focus on divvying up existing wealth instead of creating more risks making matters far worse for the people they are trying to help and the country in general. To the extent that the expanding welfare state allows more people to live without working and therefore without earning income or developing their own human capital—supporters of the welfare state are contributing to the very income disparities they so much decry, writes economist Thomas Sowell in his new book, “Wealth, Poverty and Politics.

Mr. Sowell is the author of more than 30 books over the past four decades, many having to do with what drives different social and economic outcomes among different groups in the U.S. and elsewhere. In his latest tome, he draws from this well of research to do what he has done so well for so long: question basic assumptions behind public policy and follow the facts where they lead him.

One common assumption is that proportionate or random outcomes are the natural order of things and that gaps or disparities are evidence of something wrong. In fact, huge disparities are the norm, not the exception, because the demographic, cultural, and political factors that influence the development of the human capital that makes people productive also tend to be unequal.

In 2013, only 9% of U.S. women with college degrees who gave birth were unmarried, versus 61% of women who were high-school dropouts and unmarried. Harvard's Robert Putnam reports that children from professional families will hear 19 million more words than their working-class peers before the first day of kindergarten.

These children don't have the same prospects. Equal opportunity, in the sense of being judged and rewarded by the same standards as others, cannot possibly mean equal life chances for children born and raised in these very different settings,writes Mr. Sowell. The fact that life is unfair is not the same as saying that a particular institution, or a particular society, is unfair.

The argument that social mobility is a thing of the past in the U.S. also is disputable. Longitudinal studies by the IRS and others that measure the progress of individuals over time show that the American dream is alive and well. One such paper, published by the Pew Charitable Trusts in 2012, measured whether a person has more or less income, earnings, or wealth than his or her parents did at the same age and concluded that the vast majority of Americans had higher incomes, while 50% had greater wealth.

In other studies, Pew has found generational stagnation but the authors have noted that it didn't apply to immigrants. If low-income immigrants can rise even when the native-born don't, writes Mr. Sowell, that strongly suggests that American society continues to offer opportunities to move up economically, but that not all groups make the same use of these opportunities.

Mr. Riley, a Manhattan Institute senior fellow and Journal contributor is the author of Please Stop Helping Us: How Liberals Make It Harder for Blacks to Succeed (Encounter Books, 2014).

Weekly leaderboard

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