--DEFINITION--
"A MIXED ECONOMIC SYSTEM" is one that exhibits a COMBINATION of the features of a PLANNED and a MARKET economic system.
"WHO OWNS THE PRODUCTIVE RESOURCES?" Some firms are PRIVATEY OWNED (in the 'PRIVATE SECTOR') and some are GOVERNMENT OWNED (in the PUBLIC SECTOR).
"HOW ARE PRICES SET?" PRICES are determined by the MARKET FORCES of demand and supply, and some are SET BY THE GOVERNMENT.
"WHO DECIDES WHAT TO PRODUCE?" In this type of economic system, both CONSUMERS and the GOVERNMENT decide what is produced.
In the last unit we were introduced to MARKET FAILURE, that resulted in too much or too little production and consumption, or in some cases no output whatsoever, hence the government will attempt to intervene in many ways to ensure these failures are curtailed or even eliminated, but how will they do it
TO ENCOURAGE THE CONSUMPTION/PRODUCTION of MERIT GOODS, which are UNDERPROVIDED in the free market, such as VACCINATIONS, EDUCATION and HEALTHCARE by either LOWERING THE COSTS OF PRODUCTION for producers using SUBSIDIES which will RAISE the PRICE received by producers and LOWER the PRICES paid by consumers, and thus INCREASE BOTH the QUANTITY DEMANDED and SUPPLIED or by INCREASING DEMAND through the USE OF POSITIVE ADVERTISING TO RAISE AWARENESS of the POSITIVE BENEFITS of this activity.
Explain using a diagram how a government can correct a market failure in the form of underproduction using a subsidy and positive advertising.
TO DISCOURAGE THE CONSUMPTION/PRODUCTION of DEMERIT GOODS, which are OVERPROVIDED in the free market, such as CIGARETTES, POLLUTION and ALCOHOL by RAISING THE COSTS OF PRODUCTION for producers using TAXES which will LOWER the AFTER TAX PRICE RECEIVED by producers and RAISE the PRICES for consumers and thus DECREASE BOTH THE QUANTITY DEMANDED and SUPPLIED or by DECREASING DEMAND through the USE OF NEGATIVE ADVERTISING TO RAISE AWARENESS of the NEGATIVE COSTS of this activity.
Explain using a diagram how a government can correct a market failure in the form of overproduction using a tax and negative advertising.
Government can finance the production of products that ARE BENEFICIAL TO SOCIETY, but CANNOT BE CHARGED DIRECTLY TO CUSTOMERS, such as National Defense by USING TAX CONTRIBUTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC. E.g. Public goods such as national defense.
Government can seek to prevent private sector firms from exploiting consumers by charging high prices.
Government can help vulnerable groups, ensuring that they have access to basic necessities. It can also create a more even distribution of income, by taxing the rich at a high rate.
--TYPES OF GOV'T INTERVENTION--
--MAXIMUM & MINIMUM PRICES--
--'CEILING'--
--'FLOOR'--
A government may in some situations set a legal MAXIMUM PRICE for a particular good; this is called a 'PRICE CEILING'. It means that THE PRICE THAT CAN BE LEGALLY CHARGED TO THE CUSTOMERS for the good MUST NOT BE HIGHER THAN THE LEGAL MAXIMUM PRICE.
A government may in some situations set a legal MINIMUM PRICE for a particular good; this is called a 'PRICE FLOOR'. It means that THE PRICE THAT CAN BE LEGALLY PAID TO THE PRODUCERS for the good MUST NOT BE LOWER THAN THE LEGAL MINIMUM PRICE.
A PRICE CEILING is primarily SET IN ORDER TO PROTECT THE CONSUMER, as the government may decide that the FREE MARKET PRICE IS SET TOO HIGH.
As such price ceilings are USUALLY PUT ON STAPLE FOODS, such as bread, milk, rice, and sometimes low-cost housing, which could all be described as 'NECESSITIES' for LOW-INCOME EARNERS WHO CAN'T AFFORD MORE EXPENSIVE ALTERNATIVES.
A PRICE FLOOR is primarily SET IN ORDER TO PROTECT THE PRODUCER, as the government may decide that the FREE MARKET PRICE IS SET TOO LOW and the INCOME EARNED BY THE PRODUCER IS UNSTABLE or INSUFFICIENT to guarantee them a decent standard of living.
Usually this occurs in markets that are deemed vitally iportant and which are considered merit goods.
MINIMUM WAGES
MINIMUM PRICE FOR TAXIS
MINIMUM CROP PRICES
MINIMUM ALCOHOL PRICE*
In the diagram below the maximum price ('Px') is set BELOW the equilibrium price ('P').
In the diagram below the minimum price ('Px') is set ABOVE the equilibrium price ('P').
SHORTAGES: Demand exceeds supply because the price is kept artificially low. For example, rent controls can lead to a shortage of housing.
BLACK MARKETS: People might sell the product illegally at higher prices.
REDUCED QUALITY: Producers have NO INCENTIVE to improve the quality of their goods as their is no competition.
UNMET DEMAND: Many consumers want the product, but there isn't enough supply.
SURPLUSES: Supply exceeds demand because the price is higher than what consumers are willing to pay. For example, minimum wages can lead to excess labor supply (unemployment).
GOV'T INTERVENTION: To deal with surpluses, GOVERNMENTS MIGHT BUY THE EXCESS (e.g., agricultural products) or provide subsidies.
CONSUMERS FACE HIGHER PRICES: Consumers pay more for goods or services, which can reduce overall consumption.
Using RENT CONTROL as your example explain the definition, rationale, diagram and impacts a PRICE CEILING set BELOW the free market rate will have on the market for rental accommodation. In your answer refer to the situation in MUMBAI and NY to add a real world context
Using MINIMUM WAGE as your example explain the definition, rationale, diagram and impacts a PRICE FLOOR set ABOVE the free market rate will have on the market for LABOUR. In your answer refer to the situation in THE US to add a real world context
--TO CORRECT MARKET FAILURE--
--INDIRECT TAXES--
INDIRECT (UNIT) TAXES, refers to a tax per unit that has already been imposed on the producers BEFORE the good or service is actually bought by the consumer, meaning it is considered an 'INCREASE IN THE COSTS OF PRODUCTION' and results in a LEFTWARD SHIFT IN THE SUPPLY CURVE and usually results in a REDUCTION IN PRODUCTION and CONSUMPTION levels.
"Why is it called indirect?" As the costs of production have risen the producer will try to 'pass off' this extra cost in the form of a higher price to consumers as such we say that when the customer buys the product at this higher price they are INDIRECTLY contributing to this extra tax.
Q. Why would the government want to cause a LEFTWARD SHIFT IN THE SUPPLY CURVE and REDUCE THE PRODUCTION and CONSUMPTION of a good or service? The answer is to CORRECT A MARKET FAILURE in the form of OVERPRODUCTION. or simply to COLLECT TAX REVENUE.
CIGARETTE TAX
ALCOHOL TAX
SUGAR TAX
CARBON TAX
...
In order to reduce the quantity transacted the government needs to do two things:
1) RAISE the price to the consumer, so Qd FALLS.
So the government will impose an extra cost of production on to the product which will raise its price to the consumer resulting in a fall in quantity demanded. (Law of demand)
2) LOWER the price received by the producer, so Qs FALLS.
After receiving the higher price the producer must give the tax amount to the government reducing the price they finally receive (after tax) resulting in a fall in quantity supplied (Law of supply)
Clearly the GREATER THE SIZE OF THE TAX, => the GREATER THE INCREASE IN THE FIRM'S COSTS OF PRODUCTION => the LARGER the LEFTWARD SHIFT in the SUPPLY CURVE => a LARGER FALL IN PRODUTION & CONSUMPTION.
We can see below as the size of the tax increases the fall in output gets larger, hence we can conclude that THE LARGER THE UNIT TAX THE GREATER THE IMPACT in terms of REDUCING PRODUCTION and CONSUMPTION.
As unit taxes involve raising prices and falling Qd, we already know that in terms of the fall in output the LOWEST IMPACT will be on INELASTIC GOODS, compared to ELASTIC GOODS.
We can see below that AS THE PED BECOMES MORE ELASTIC (FLATTER) => THE GREATER THE IMPACT in terms of REDUCING PRODUCTION and CONSUMPTION and vice versa.
Why? Well as we learned in the PED unit goods with many close substitutes are elastic so for example if the price of regular coke went up due to a sugar tax, then sales would fall significanty as consumers would turn to the cheaper non-sugar version.
Indirect taxes are VERY EFFECTIVE, as they almost ALWAYS RESULT IN A FALL IN TOTAL REVENUE (Unless the demand is perfectly inelastic), which incentivises producers to reduce output closer to the socially optimal level.
Sketch the only scenario in which a tax has no impact on total revenue
--SUBSIDIES--
SUBSIDIES, refers to a payment per unit that has already been given to the producers BEFORE the good or service is actually bought by the consumer, meaning it is considered an 'DECREASE IN THE COSTS OF PRODUCTION' and results in a RIGHTTWARD SHIFT IN THE SUPPLY CURVE and usually results in an EXPANSION IN PRODUCTION and CONSUMPTION levels.
Q. Why would the government want to cause a RIGHTWARD SHIFT IN THE SUPPLY CURVE and EXPAND THE PRODUCTION and CONSUMPTION of a good or service? The answer is to CORRECT A MARKET FAILURE in the form of UNDERPRODUCTION.
In order to increase the quantity transacted the government needs to do two things:
1) LOWER the price to the consumer, so Qd RISES:
So the government will give extra income to the producer, effectively reducing the costs of production on to the product which will LOWER its price to the consumer resulting in a RISE in quantity demanded. (Law of demand).
2) RAISE the price received by the producer, so Qs RISES:
After receiving the subsidy the price the producer finally receives RISES resulting in a RISE in quantity supplied (Law of supply).
Clearly the GREATER THE SIZE OF THE SUBSIDY, => the GREATER THE DECREASE IN THE FIRM'S COSTS OF PRODUCTION => the LARGER the RIGHTWARD SHIFT in the SUPPLY CURVE => a LARGER RISE in PRODUTION & CONSUMPTION.
We can see below as the size of the subsidy increases the rise in output gets larger, hence we can conclude that THE LARGER THE UNIT SUBSIDY THE GREATER THE IMPACT in terms of INCREASING PRODUCTION and CONSUMPTION.
--PRIVATISATION--
As unit subsidies involve LOWERING PRICES and thus INCREASING Qd, we already know that the rise in output will be GREATER the more ELASTIC the demand compared to INELASTIC GOODS.
We can see below that AS THE PED BECOMES MORE ELASTIC (FLATTER) => THE GREATER THE IMPACT in terms of INCREASING PRODUCTION and CONSUMPTION and vice versa.
Why? Well as we learned in the PED unit goods with many close substitutes are elastic so for example if the price of Pepsi went down due to a subsidy, then sales would rise significantly as consumers of Coca-Cola would turn to the now cheaper Pepsi.
--COMPETITION POLICIES--
As mentioned previously MONOPOLY POWER can be a BARRIER TO COMPETITION, as such governments will try to promote competition and prevent firms from abusing their market power THROUGH COMPETITION LAWS (Also known as 'ANTI-TRUST LAWS')
These include: REMOVING RESTRICTION ON THE ENTRY OF NEW FIRMS INTO A MARKET, MAKING UNCOMPETITIVE PRACTICES SUCH AS PRICE FIXING, PREDATORY PRICING, and LIMIT PRICING ILLEGAL as well as STOPPING SOME FIRMS FROM MERGING, if it is thought that the merged firm will act against the interests of consumers by charging high prices and producing poor quality products.
The UK's Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) has blocked numerous mergers such as:
Ryanair and Aer Lingus merger - blocked in June 2007 due to concerns over reduced competition in the Irish and European air travel markets.
Sainsbury's and Asda merger - blocked in April 2019
In the case of fines, the firm is often too large and the amount is inconsequential.
--ENVIRONMENTAL POLICIES--
CARBON TAXES work exactly like an indirect tax on cigarettes by charging firms a fixed amount per unit of emissions they create, which adds to the firm's COSTS OF PRODUCTION causing them to reduce output.
If firm's exceed limits or create environmental issues they can also be FINED large sums of money to deincentivise these activities.
--REGULATIONS--
LEGISLATION & REGULATION refers to LAWS implemented that for the most part aim to REDUCE THE DEMAND for DEMERIT GOODS.
This results in a LEFTWARD SHIFT in the DEMEND CURVE.
--SODA BAN--
--AGE RESTRICTIONS ON BUYING TOBACCO--
--SMOKING FREE ZONES--
--ALCOHOL FREE ZONES--
--GENERATIONAL BAN--
Can be effective if ENFORCED REGULARLY and CONSEQUENCES ARE PROHIBITIVE.
The HIGH COST of ENFORCEMENT
Often BLACK MARKETS develop.
The FINE is set TOO LOW?
...
--NATIONALISATION--
NATIONALISATION in this case refers to when THE GOVERNMENT EITHER SETS-UP and RUNS an INDUSTRY or TAKES OVER THE RUNNING OF A PRIVATELY RUN INDUSTRY.
"How is this related to correcting market failure you ask?" Well once owned by the government then their sole aim is to work in the public interest, which 'SHOULD' mean the following....
They DO NOT IGNORE EXTERNAL COSTS AND BENEFITS in their production decisions.
Focused on BOOSTING the country's GDP as opposed to say foreign MNCs.
If it's a MONOPOLY, it WILL NOT ABUSE ITS MARKET POWER, unlike private monopolies.
GUARANTEE LOWER PRICES and GOOD QUALITY when supplying BASIC NECESSITIES such as water, transport and electricity.
There are, however, a number of disadvantages associated with state-owned enterprises.
• They can be difficult to manage and control. The large size of the organisations may mean that time has to be spent on meetings and communicating with staff , slowing down decision making.
• They may become inefficient, produce low quality products and charge relatively high prices, due to a lack of competition and the knowledge that they cannot go bankrupt.
• They will need to be subsidised if they are loss making. The use of tax revenue to support them has an opportunity cost – it could be used to spend on, say, training more teachers and nurses.
Concern about the performance of state-owned enterprises and increased confidence in market forces has led a number of countries to sell their state-owned enterprises, or part of their state-owned enterprises, to the private sector. Those supporting this move argue that private sector firms are likely to produce the products desired by consumers, at a low cost and off er them at low prices. This is because market forces provide an incentive for firms to be eff icient in the form of profit and a threat of bankruptcy if they are ineff icient. Besides low prices and high quality, privatisation may result in greater choice. Freedom from government regulation may reduce administration costs and enable managers to respond more quickly to changing conditions. There may, also, be less risk of under-investment in the private sector. The funds available to a public sector firm for investment will depend on the profits it earns and its ability to convince shareholders and lenders of its success. Public corporations may be kept short of funds for investment, however successful they are, if the government wants to spend the money elsewhere. Privatisation, however, is itself criticised. There is no guarantee that private sector firms will face the full pressure of market forces. Some private sector firms may not face competition – they may be monopolies (i.e. the only firm selling the product). In this case, they can be inefficient, charge high prices and produce low quality products without compromising on profits. They may not take into account the total costs and benefits to the society due to their actions. For example, they may cause pollution. Privatisation also reduces a government’s control of the economy.
--DIRECT PROVISION--
DIRECT PROVISION refers to when the governments produce or pay private sector firms to produce goods and services such as MERIT GOODS and in particular PUBLIC GOODS and raise the finance through taxation.