A RESUME OF BASIC ECONOMICS
Note: to use as a dictionary of terms - use "find"
in your
browser menu bar.
CONTENTS:
Comments,
questions and suggestions??
- The Market System and the Circular Flow of Income.
- Microeconomic Basics - how markets work
through
Supply
and Demand
- Microeconomics of Trade - how different
markets
for the
same goods interact.
- Microeconomics of Quality - an elaboration of
Demand
- Microeconomics of Production - an elaboration
of
Supply
- The
logic of General Equilibrium: in search of harmony.
- Macroeconomic Basics - the Circular Flow of Income
(CFoI),
with Government and Fiscal Policy
- Money, Interest and Discounting
1. The Market System
and the Circular Flow of Income.
The Market system works through specialisation and trade:
People, communities, regions and countries are better off specialising
in production and trading the products with neighbours than they would
be if they tried to be completely self-sufficient. If this were
not
the case, markets would not exist.
Specialisation and Trade relies on people and their businesses
exploiting
their comparative advantage - specialising their productive
activities
in those areas and products for which they are best able, relative
to all the other things which they might do instead. Their
opportunity
costs should then be less than the returns they can earn doing their
present
things, and they will make a positive return as a consequence.
The general picture of interacting markets - the circular flow of
income:
- Households own the factors of production (land -
including
raw materials, labour, management and physical capital).
- Note - capital here means physical capital - plant,
equipment,
buildings
and machinery etc. (c.f. financial and money markets below)
- Households rent these factors to firms, in return for
income:
land rents; capital interest and dividend payments, and equity
appreciation
(capital gains); wages and salaries.
- Factor ownership provides income which fuels consumption and
demand in
the goods and services markets
- Firms rent the factors of production from households according to
their
demands for these factors, which is derived from the demands
for
the final goods and services
- Factor markets operate so as to encourage the owners of land,
labour,
manaement
and capital to rent out the services of the factors to the highest
bidder
- Firms add value to their own purchases of inputs and raw
materials.
They earn gross margins (total revenues minus cash input costs
[fuel,
power, packaging etc.] which is the value added to these inputs.
The Gross margin, or added value, or gross product
(each term means essentially the same thing for our purposes) is the
income
available to the fixed factors - land, labour, management and capital.
- In equilibrium, these returns will be normal profits - each firm
earning
sufficient to cover the opportunity costs of the factors of production
which they employ.
[Note: profits in the everyday sense are, typically, just the
returns to capital - the earnings of the firms which are left after all
other legitimate costs (including labour and management costs) have
been
deducted. For self-employed family businesses, taxable profits
will
include the returns to the owners own labour and management, as well as
returns to the owners land and capital, less allowable expenses in
servicing
mortgages, loans and debts.]
The UK food chain illustrates the outcome of this circular flow of
income.
Agricultural and Food Chain, UK, 2000
Farms produce £15.3 bn. of output, of which
£8.7bn. is spent
on purchased inputs, leaving £6.6bn. as the gross product (gross
margin) or returns to the factors of production (land, labour,
management
and capital).
- The farm sector generates incomes to all those with a direct
interest
in
farming - the labour, owners of the capital (including the banks and
their
shareholders), the owners of the land, and the managers and farmers
themselves.
- Likewise, the input supply industries also process their own
inputs,
using
their own factors of production, producing their outputs (purchased by
the farm sector) and generating their own incomes to land (including
natural
resources), labour, management and capital.
- Farm Output, in turn, is further processed by the Processing,
Distribution
and Retailing (PDR) sectors to generate both incomes to their own
factors,
and also the final output purchased by the final consumers.
- Thus, the final consumption figure (£123 bn.)
represents
the
cumulative total of all values added throughout the food chain,
and hence represents the total cumulative income earned by all
those
engaged in this food chain.
- Note that imports generate incomes in other countries rather than
the
UK,
while exports generate incomes in the UK.
Measurement Issues:
- Each of these flows (measured in £ bn.) represents a large
collection
of individual trades (prices times quantities): P
x Q
- Flows change through time because both prices and quantities
change: P1
x Q1 different from P2 x Q2
- Comparison between different years (periods) compares both price
and
quantity
changes
- Prices represent that rates at which quantities of one
good
or service
are exchanged for other goods and services - including the services of
factors of production (land, labour, management and capital), whose
prices
are rents, wages and salaries, and rates of return to capital.
- With prices set at some given, fixed level:
quantities
then
represent real income and real output of goods and
services
- the actual quantities of factor services which can be traded for the
purchase of actual quantities of goods and services - the purchasing
power
of each good or service in terms of all other goods and services.
- To measure these real quantities, prices (wages,
rents
etc.
as well as prices of goods and services) have to be fixed at some
given
level. - Pf. - constant prices
- Comparison of Pf x Q1 with Pf x Q2 then shows the changes in
quantities
between Q1 and Q2.
- Also, comparison between Pf x Q1 and P1 x Q1 shows the difference
in
prices
between the fixed, constant, prices and those ruling in period 1.
- Notice - simply fixing the price of ONE good (say for
fertiliser),
allows
the actual physical quantities of fertiliser used by farms between
years
to be measured, but does NOT allow the measurement of the purchasing
power
of this fertiliser - to measure the purchasing power, we need
to
fix all prices at some constant level.
Back to Contents.
2. MICROECONOMICS -
THE
BASICS: HOW MARKETS WORK
- Markets: processes through which demands
for
things
(goods, products, commodities, services) are matched with supplies
of those things: the economic world consists of firms
(businesses) who
supply or produce and consumers (households) who demand and buy
goods and services.
- Demand: the desire to possess or use something
backed
up with purchasing
power
- expressed or exhibited by people as households or consumers in
two
major
dimensions:
- as a willingness to pay for something - how much will
you pay
for
this thing? What Price is it worth paying for it?
This
is the Demand Price
- as a quantity which they are willing to buy at this
price,
whatever
it is - the Quantity Demanded.
[NOTE quality is also important in practice - for the present
ignored for simplicity]
- purchasing power: =
- income: annual (or time dependent) flow
- wealth (= stored income; a stock of income)
- or borrowings (credit), which as debts to lenders, requires servicing
(repayments, including interest payments - see below)
- Final Demand is expressed or exhibited by households -
the
final
consumers. In addition to purchasing power (income, wealth and thus
credit
worthiness), final demand will depend on,
- Tastes and Preferences of consumers (predispostions,
attitudes,
perceptions,
personalities etc.)
- family conditions, social circumstances, occupational
characters etc.
- demonstration effects (seeing other people using them) and
habits
- and very likely a host of other things, too, dealt with by
Marketing
Courses.
- and on the cost of this good relative to the prices of other
goods and
services - the opportunities forgone by buying this good rather
than another (possibly similar, or of a different quality)
- Intermediate Demand is expressed by firms and
businesses
for the
inputs they require for their production processes, and is derived
from the demand expressed for their final products - so is also called Derived
Demand, depending on
- the conditions of final demand for the product
- the conditions facing the producer - the supply conditions.
- Supply: the willingness to produce, market and
sell
something
- expressed or exhibited by people as firms or businesses
- as a willingness to provide something - how much
money do you
need
to be willing to provide this thing? What price will you accept
in
return for providing it? This is the Supply Price.
- And as the quantity they willing to supply at this price -
the Quantity
Supplied
- These will depend on, especially:
- the costs of providing the thing (the costs of the
inputs
needed)
- what else the person or business might do instead of
providing
this
thing - the opportunity cost as the value of the best
alternative
which is given up in order to provide this thing
- Market Supplies and Market Demands are the aggregates
(sums of) individual firms supply and individuals (housholds)
demand.
But: people (as consumers or households) have different Demand
Prices
and are willing to pay for different quantities. Likewise, people
(as firms or businesses) have different supply prices and willing to
provide
different quantities. And each of these decisions depends on a
host
of other things - really complicated!
- SO, SIMPLIFY: hold all these other conditions and
circumstances
(things) constant - consider them as being fixed at some particular
level or value - ceteris paribus - all other things considered
equal
(unchanging or invariable) -> the MARKET DIAGRAM.
The ONLY
things which are changing in this diagram are PRICE AND QUANTITY - everything
else which might affect either Supply or Demand is held constant -
ceteris
paribus. Among the more obvious things held constant is the
QUALITY
of the good or service - we assume here that each unit of the good
(measured
on the horizontal axis) is exactly the same as every other unit - the
good
is homogenous.
- As price is reduced, more (whatever it is) will be demanded - more
people will be willing to buy more of the thing at lower prices
than at higher prices (it is cheaper and it will be used or abused and
wasted more as a result).
- the Demand Curve slopes downwards, and shows the
relationship
between the price people are willing to pay and the quantity
they are willing to buy, all other things which might affect
this
decision being held constant.
- As price is increased, more will be supplied - more
people
(firms)
will be willing to provide more at higher prices than at lower
prices:
- the Supply Curve slopes upwards and shows the
relationship
between
the price suppliers are willing to accept and the quantity
they are willing to supply, all other things which might
affect
this decision being held constant.
- The Market will Balance - be in equilibrium -
when the
quantity
demanded is equal to the quantity supplied (Qe = quantity supplied =
quantity demanded)
- at any quantity less than Qe (closer to the origin), the demand
price
(shown
by the demand curve) is higher than the supply price (shown by the
supply
curve) - so suppliers would make money and more of them would be
willing
to provide more, while consumers would be willing to buy more if they
could
(at a lower price).
- at any quantity greater than Qe (further away from the origin),
the
demand
price is less than the supply price - so suppliers would find that they
could not sell what they had produced - stocks of unsold goods would
pile
up - and would be obliged to cut back on production.
- At this Market Equilibrium (Qe) the Supply Price
equals the
Demand
Price (both at Pe)
- at any price higher than Pe, the quantity supplied is
greater
than
the quantity demanded - there is excess supply - unsold
supplies
building up as stocks or inventories - so price will
tend
to fall back towards Pe
- at any price lower than Pe, quantity demanded is
greater than
quantity
supplied - there is excess demand - queues of willing buyers at
this price - so price will tend to rise towards Pe.
- At Market Equilibrium: Pe x Qe = total expenditure by
consumers
= total
revenues to producers.
What happens when OTHER THINGS CHANGE?
the Supply and Demand Curves SHIFT TO REFLECT THESE CHANGES,
AND MARKET PRICES AND QUANTITIES CHANGE.
- You should now check your understanding of this concept by
thinking
of which way (to the right or to the left) each curve (Demand and
Supply)
will shift as the other things change.
See Here for a check
on your answers.
- Extent of the Price and Quantity changes when
Demand
or Supply
Curves SHIFT depend on how steep or flat the other curve is - try it
for
yourself!
- But, how steep or flat each curve is depends on the units we use
to
measure
price and quantity.
- So, we measure the ELASTICITY of supply and demand curves
- how
responsive each curve is to changes in price (or SHIFTS in the other
curve):
- Elasticity of demand (or supply)
= % change in Quantity Demanded (or Supplied) per % change in
Price
(which removes the problem of what units we use to measure either price
or quantity)
Notice:
The slope of a straight line demand curve is CONSTANT AND NEGATIVE (it
slopes DOWNWARDS to the right), but the ELASTICITY IS NOT CONSTANT. The
Elasticity of Demand
- equals minus infinity at the vertical axis (top left hand
end),
where P is a postive number, and Q is zero)
- equals minus zero at the horizontal axis (bottom right
hand
end),
where P is zero.
- equals minus 1 half way down the curve (where P/Q =
change in
P/change
in Q, so (change in Q/change in P) times P/Q = -1).
You should now revise your understanding of this concept of elasticity
by doing the same arithmetic for Supply. Use a straight line supply
curve which starts at the Origin (P and Q both = 0:
producers
are not willing to supply anything for nothing.) Try this
before
reading on. What do you get? You should get:
The Elasticity of the straight line supply curve
passing through the origin (Qs = 0 if Price = 0) is ALWAYS +1,
regardless
of the slope of the supply curve: P/Q = change in P/change in Q,
so (change in Q/change in P) times P/Q = +1, since supply curves slope
upwards.)
[Notice: although these notes use linear (straight
line)
supply and demand curves - this is only an analytic convenience - in
practice
we seldom know exactly what any particular demand or supply curve looks
like, so we approximate them with their linear equivalents at the
observed
quantities supplied and demanded and the prices observed in the
market.]
You should now be able to define and explain other elasticities:
(how
are they defined and what do their sizes and signs mean?)
- Cross price elasticities of demand and supply - the
demand
response
(change in quantity demanded) to a change in the price of another
good - which will be positive for substitute goods and negative for
complementary
goods; the supply response (change in quantity supplied) to a
change
in the price of another good.
- Income elasticity of demand - the demand response
(change in
quantity
demanded) to a change in income.
- Note: The Expenditure
Elasticity: % change in the spending on a good (or service) per %
change in income - this may not be the same as the Income
elasticity (which measures the response of quantities purchased to
income changes), because as people get richer, they may well prefer to
buy better quality (or be prepared to pay premium prices for less
trouble and effort in buying or using the good or service). The difference between the Expenditure
and Income elasticities thus measures the extent to which higher
incomes lead to an increase in the demand for quality (as approximated
by the unit price paid tfor the good or service)
THIS IS THE ESSENCE OF MARKETS - IF YOU UNDERSTAND THESE CONCEPTS AND
THE WAYS IN WHICH THEY CAN BE USED, YOU HAVE THE BASICS OF
MICROECONOMICS.
Back to Contents.
3. Microeconomics of Trade -
how different
markets for the same goods interact.
Trade happens when someone discovers that market prices for the same
goods
are different in different places - high prices in one place and low in
another. Common business sense then takes over - for example,
wheat
in North America versus wheat in Europe:
- Imports reduce the price of the good in the importing country (or
region
or locality) and increase the quantity which is purchased.
- Exports raise the price in the exporting region or location and
reduce
the quantity consumed (purchased)
So, where will the process of Trade reach equilibrium? Think,
before
you read on:
Trade will be in equilibrium when it no longer pays to buy cheap and
sell dear - in the limit, when the prices in the two markets are the
SAME
(apart from transport and marketing costs between the two
locations).
The process of trade can be represented through:
- Excess Demand (XD): equivalent to the Demand for
Imports -
the difference between the quantity demanded and the quantity supplied
in the local market at each and every price - which equals zero at the
local equilibrium price (Pe in the diagram above), and increases as
price
is reduced below Pe - so is Downward sloping.
- Excess Supply (XS): equivalent to the Supply of Exports
-
the difference
between the quantity supplied and the quantity demanded in the local
market
at each and every price - which is zero at the local equilibrium price
(Pu above), and increases as price is increased above this level - so
is
Upward sloping.
With NO transport and marketing costs, the trading equilibrium will
be at the point of intersection of XD and XS - the same price in each
market,
with quantities exported equalling quantities imported. This is
sometimes
called the "Law of One Price"
- In practice, there are costs of moving goods between
different
markets
(especially over international borders), so prices of the same goods
are
not the same in different markets - they will generally be higher in
importing
markets and lower in exporting markets.
- The Importing price is often referred to in the statistics and
trade
press
as the "cif" price - meaning that the cost of the good, insurance
and freight charges are all included in the price.
- The Exporting price is often referred to as the "fob"
price -
meaning
the price of the good free on board the
exporting
ship, having been paid for, but not yet moved.
- The difference between these two prices therefore reflects the
costs of
moving the good (more generally, moving and marketing it)
- Although this illustration is in terms of international markets,
EXACTLY
THE SAME PRINCIPLES APPLY to separated regional or local markets.
Back to Contents.
4. Microeconomics of Quality - an
elaboration
of Demand
But beer drinking in the Student Union and the City pubs are not the
same
experience - they are of different qualities.
- Differentiated Goods - different qualities of
beer
and drinking
environments (students union versus a city (or other) pub of club) are
characterised by different demands and supplies - their
"qualities"
are different.
- So, the Markets for Differentiated Goods are segmented -
they
are
somewhat different markets, each selling beers (and other things) -
beer
is a differentiated product, and beer markets are segmented - customers
and suppliers have different tastes and requirements.
- Such markets can be represented as follows: Du and Su for
the
Students
Union Beer, Dt and St for the city (town) beer. The Right Hand
Side
diagram is simply the SUM of the two different segments in
terms
of number of pints (the quantity axis).
- ST is the horizontal sum of St (town
supply)
and Su
(Union supply). At each and every price, the total quantity
supplied
in Newcastle is equal to the quantity supplied in the Union plus the
quantity
supplied in the town at that price. At price Pa, QT, the total
quantity
supplied is equal to the supply in the Union market (Us) at this
price
(Pa) plus the supply in the town market (Ts) at this price
(Pa). The same logic is used to construct every other point on
the
ST curve.
- DT is the horizontal sum of Dt, the town demand
and Du,
the Union demand - so total demand (QT) at price Pa is equal to the
demand
in the Union market (Ud) at price Pa plus the demand in the Town market
(Td) at this price Pa. The same logic is used to construct every
other point on the DT curve.
- Pa (the average price of beer in Newcastle) is a
fictitious price.
Neither of our "real" markets shows this price Pa. The Union
segment
has settled down at price Pu, and the town at price Pt.
- The average market price (Pa) = the total revenues
from
the sale
of beer (equal to the total expenditure on beer in Newcastle
(Pu*Qu
+ Pt*Qt) divided by the total quantity of beer sold (Qu + Qt =
QT).
The average price (sometimes called the "unit value") is a weighted
average price - the weights being the quantities sold at each price
making up the average price.
- Consumer spending on beer equal the Revenues for
the
publicans
(Suppliers).
- Analysis of the Newcastle (or UK) beer market can frequently be
done
using
the RHS diagram WITHOUT WORRYING ABOUT THE DETAILS of the
segmentation.
Changing incomes, tastes and preferences for beer, population sizes
etc.
will tend to affect all market segments, almost regardless of quality.
- On the other hand, sometimes consideration of the specific
Segmentation
is necessary, in which case, it is IMPORTANT to remember that shifts in
demand specific to one segment will imply offsetting
shifts
in the other segments. If tastes and preferences for one segment
increase, then they are very likely to imply an offsetting fall in
other
segments.
- Importance of Quality in a market can be indicated by
the
relationship
between the income elasticity and the expenditure elasticity
for a product:
- Income elasticity (Ey) = % change in Quantity demanded per
%
change
in Income
- Expenditure elasticity (Ee) = % change in Expenditure on
product per
% change in Income
The assumption is that better (higher) quality products (ceteris
paribus)
cost more per unit than lower quality products. As incomes
increase,
we expect people to shift towards better quality products, if they are
available. If so, then Ee will be greater than Ey.
(More spent, but not on so much of an increae in quantity). - Quality
Elasticity (with respect to Income) = Ee - Ey. If
positive and larger than zero, quality matters.
Back to Contents.
5. Microeconomics of Production -
an
elaboration of Supply
Economical Simplification of a single Business or Firm of any
sort - the logic of competitive supply: The following is an
explanation of the implications of competitive survival of firms, NOT a
management prescription of how to manage such firms.
What happens to total costs as
production levels increase, ceteris paribus?
The ONLY things which we are changing in this analysis are the level of
output (production) of the firm (and thus the level of inputs and
resources
that are needed to produce more output). The costs of the inputs
per unit are held fixed and constant. The technology available is
fixed. The quality and productivity of the inputs are given and
known, and unchanging.
The quality of the product is fixed.
Summary:
Fixed
costs are those costs (including all relevant opportunity costs)
which do not vary as the quantity produced varies. Variable
costs
are those costs which do vary as production quantities change (increase
as output is increased). Total costs equal fixed
costs plus variable costs. The general shape will look
pretty
much like this, for any production process we care to think of.
- Fixed Costs - sometimes considered to be equivalent to the costs
of the factors
of production: land, labour, management and capital plant and
equipment etc. - the resources needed to be in production at all.
- Variable Costs - sometimes considered to be equivalent to the
costs of
the purchased inputs (fuel, raw materials, packaging materials
etc.)
- However, the distinction between fixed and variable costs depends
critically
on the particular and specifc conditions and circumstances of the firm
in question. The precise details of these specific (and highly
differentiated)
conditions do not need to concern us here. The general principles
still apply, whatever the precise fixed or variable
classification
of particular costs. The specific classification of costs is not
fundamentally important.
Unit Costs - costs per unit produced:
Summary
of Costs per unit produced:
- Average Total Costs (total costs ÷ quantity
produced) is
shown by the slope of a line from the origin to the total cost
curve.
ATC is therefore "U" shaped, with a minimum where
the origin
line is tangential to the total cost curve.
- Average Variable Cost (AVC) is defined in exactly the
same
way (as
total variable costs ÷ quantity produced), and exhibits the same
"U" shape.
- Marginal cost (the cost of an extra or additional unit
of output)
is the slope of the total cost curve itself
- MC is at a minimum where the total cost curve is
flattest,
where its slope is least.
- For the quantity at which average cost is at a minimum,
average
cost
is equal to marginal cost. The marginal cost curve cuts the
average
cost curve from below, at the average cost curve's minimum point.
This has to be true by definition. Average cost at its minimum is
the slope of the tangent from the origin to the total cost cost
curve.
The tangent to the total cost curve has the same slope at that point as
the slope of the total cost curve, which is the marginal cost at that
point.
- These diagrams assume that the manager(s) of the firm are as
efficient
as they can be in making and implimenting the decisions to change
output
levels. They are effective in keeping costs as low as possible
consistent
with health, safety and product integrity. In short, they
assume
effective business managment and operation.
Maximising Profits - stylised illustration of the firms cost
curves:
To
maximise
profits ( = total revenues minus total costs): produce at that
output
level at which
marginal cost equals marginal revenue. So long as
the MC curve is rising, this will mean that all previous units of
output
cost less to produce than they earn in revenue, and any greater level
of
output will cost more to produce than it earns in revenue.
In a competitive industry (many other competing firms) the price
is set by the market - firms in a competitive market are
Price
Takers: there is no sense in charging less than the other firms,
because
this firm cannot produce enough to satisfy the whole market, and if it
trys to charge more, it loses sales to other competing firms.
In this competitive case, Price = Marginal Revenue (MR) (the
addition to total revenue consequent on the sale of one extra
unit).
Hence, profit maximisation involves producing at the quantity for which
MC
= MR = Price. If the market price is P, then the
profit
maximising output level is Q*, at which point MC = MR.
At this point, Average cost = C*, so that total cost = C* x Q*, while
total revenues = P x Q*. So, Profit = total revenues
minus
total costs = (P - C*)x Q* = the shaded area.
This profit is Pure (Economic) Profit - since the total costs include
all opportunity costs, the excess of revenues over total costs is pure
or economic profit over and above the returns necessary to cover all
costs. NOTICE - this Price = MC rule is the logical outcome of a
firm's competitive behaviour, NOT a prescription for the effective
management of the firm.
If this firm is making pure profit, then other firms will be
attracted
into this industry to produce this product. As they do, so total
market supply will increase, and the market price will fall. When
will this competitive market be in equilibrium?
When
Price = MC = Min ATC (at Ce in this diagram) with no
pure
profits to encourage firms to expand or enter the industry, and
enough
to cover all costs, including opportunity costs. Each of the
firms
make just enough of a return to be willing to stay in the business
rather
than doing something else. The return that is just enough is the
return which covers all of the costs, cash costs and opportunity
costs.
The opportunity costs measure how much each firm could earn if it moved
its land, labour, capital and management into some other business or
occupation.
So long as each earns at least this return, each will be content to
stay
in this business indefinitely. If prices fall below this level,
firms
will leave the industry as the opportunity arises, and supplies will
fall,
and prices will start to rise again back to the equilibrium level.
Industry Supply - depends on:
- each firms individual response to price changes
- the change in the number of firms in the industry (product
producing
sector)
- whether the situation is supposed to be Long or Short Run
- Long Run: all factors of production and all
production inputs
considered to be Variable - can be changed by the firms in response to
changes in their economic environment.
- Short Run: - at least some factors of production and
inputs are
considered to be fixed at their current levels - cannot be
changed
in response to changing signals.
Clearly, there will be greater scope for responses in the Long run
(when everything can be changed) than in the Short run, when only some
things can be changed.
1. Firm's response to price changes:
- represented by the firm's marginal cost curve. For
a
firm
in
a competitive industry or sector, profit maximising means producing
where
price = marginal cost. Hence, as price changes, so firm output
will
change according to the MC curve.
- Long Run Marginal Cost curves will generally be flatter - more
elastic
- than Short Run marginal cost curves.
- For firms in a competitive industry (many competing firms), any
one
single
firm's changes in output, and hence changes in demands for inputs and
resources,
will NOT significantly affect the costs per unit of each of these
inputs
and resources. Hence, marginal cost (and all other cost curves)
for
the firm assume that the cost per unit of inputs and resources
is
fixed and given. Marginal cost curves slope upwards because each
extra unit of output requires more physical units of input and resource
to produce - not because the prices of these inputs
increases.
NOTE - if this is not the case, then the firms were not operating
efficiently
in the first place - they could have produced more and earned more than
they were doing.
2. Industry response to price changes (caused by
shifts
in demand for the products):
- In the Short Run - the industry supply curve can
be
thought
of as the sum of all the individual firms marginal cost curves.
- BUT, there is one important caveat to this
notion:
- If all firms increase their outputs up their marginal cost
curves, they
are all demanding more inputs to produce the extra output.
- This increased demand for inputs (shifting input demand
curves to the
right)
will tend to increase the price (unit cost) of the inputs.
- This increase in the cost of inputs will shift the
marginal cost
curves
upwards.
- Hence, the Short Run Industry Supply Curve (SRS) will tend to
be
Steeper
(more inelastic) than the individual firms marginal cost curves,
because their collective demand for inputs will tend to change the
prices of these inputs.
- In the Long Run - increased demand for the industry
products
will
tend to increase the price, thus increasing the profits earned by each
firm in the industry. More firms will be attracted into the
sector,
shifting the SRS to the right, increasing industry output and reducing
prices again.
- The outcome is illustrated in the following diagram. Start
at an
equilibrium position of Pe, with firms producing qe, all making normal
profits (that is, covering all their costs including their opportunity
costs) and with the sum total indistry output at Qe.
-
Now suppose
that demand shifts right to D1. Initially, each existing firm
increases
output up its own MC curve, and makes pure profits. New firms are
attracted into the industry, increasing industry output and damping
down
the initial price increase. Increasing output increases the costs of
inputs
which shifts cost curves upwards to MC1 and ATC1. The new long
run
equilibrium results when firms are once again only making normal profit
(price Pe* = ATC1 = MC1), just covering all costs at their new
level.
- The Industry long run supply curve (LRS) traces out the
increase
in output resulting from the shift in demand.
- Key Factors affecting the elasticity of supply
- It will always take time for the full supply response to a
demand
change
to materialise - long run elasticities more elastic than short run.
Over
and above this general condition:
- Flexibility of production systems and processes - the
more
flexible,
the more elastic supply;
- The more permanent the shift in demand is expected
to
be,
the more likely it is that firms will take long run decisions and that
new firms will become established - so the more elastic the
supply
response will be.
- The more industry or sector specific are the inputs and
resources
used, and the more limited they are in supply, the greater will
be the cost increase associated with industry expansion, and the less
elastic will be the industry supply response; (e.g. -
agriculture,
with the requirement for land, which is limited in total supply).
Imperfect Competition: the key difference
between perfect competition and imperfect competition
is
the nature of the demand facing the firm. -
- perfect competitors are Price Takers - cannot set or affect the
market
price on their own;
- imperfect competitors are Price Setters - they can set their own
prices,
and their sales levels affect the prices they can charge.
- Imperfect competitors face downward sloping demand curves,
rather
than the perfectly elastic (horizontal) demand curves which facce each
FIRM in perfect competition.
- So, for imperfect competition, Price DOES NOT equal Marginal
Revenue
(MR)
- the additional revenue earned by imperfect competitors from the sale
of an extra unit of production requires that the price charged for all
sales has also to be reduced - the Marginal Revenue curve is therefore steeper
(more inelastic) than the demand curve.
- For a linear demand curve, the MR curve will be twice as steep
as the
demand
curve (beginning at the same price on the vertical axis as the demand
curve,
but intersecting the horizontal (quantity) axis at half the quantity of
the demand curve
Monopolistic Competition: - differentiate their products
from those of their competitors (advertising, brand loyalty etc.), but
are vulnerable to competition from rival firms for market shares.
-
Profit
Maximising
means produce at quantity for which MR = MC.
- Set price for this quantity (Q0) according to consumers
willingness to
pay (the demand curve price for this quantity - P0
- Cost of producing this quantity (Q0) is AC0 per unit, so profit =
(p0 -
AC0) x Q0; the shaded area.
- So, more firms will try and enter this industry
- with the effect that the demand curve and MR curve for this firm
will
SHIFT
to the left as new entrants take market share
- Equilibrium in this Monopolistic Competition sector will occur
when
there
are no pure profits left to attract new entrants
- No Pure Profits when, and only when, the Demand Curve shifts far
enough
to the left to lie at a TANGENT to the AC curve - then Price is set so
as to equal AC.
- At this production (sales) point, MC will also equal MR - profit
maximising
with no pure profits.
Pure Monopoly:
The same as Monopolistic Competition EXCEPT that new firms CANNOT enter
the market to errode this firms market share.
The first diagram above, from Monopolistic Competition applies to
Monopolists.
Reasons for Pure Monopoly - single supplier to whole market:
- Natural Monopoly: production and supply conditions such
that
there
is only room for one supplier from the whole market - costs are such
that
one firm can supply the total market more efficiently (lower costs)
than
a collection of firms (e.g. gas, electricity, railways etc.)
- Patent rights over technologies - giving single firm temporary
advantage
- Monopoly Property Rights over necessary raw materials
- Predatory business practices and artificial barriers to entry of
other
potential competitors
1 and 2 are probably justifiable reasons for a monopoly - 3 and 4 are
not,
and are typically outlawed, or at least restrained (by patent laws,
etc.).
But Monopolists do not always make pure profits because:
- Market is not large enough to allow monopolist to exploit cost
advantage
- railways in early days.
- Market shrinks because of substitutes (e.g. road and air for
rail) -
note:
existence of close substitutes will make demand facing monopolist more
elastic - bringing demand and MR curves closer together and reducing
scope
for pure profits.
- Costs increase (cost curves rise) because:
- suppliers and labour force also have more market power against
a single
user
- management performance falls through lack of competitive spur
to do
better
Natural Monopolies are sensible from an economic point of view - but
require
Regulation
by Government to ensure that consumers and users are not ripped
off.
Major Problems for Regulators:
- Control over monoplists costs - how to ensure efficient
production and
operation?
- Setting socially acceptable prices - how to set prices to users
so as
to
cover legitimate costs but not result in over-supply (costs higher than
willingness to pay)?
Back to Contents.
6. The logic of
General
Equilibrium: in search of harmony.
The whole economy, even for a small region, is a pretty complex
phenomenon.
So we simplify it.
Se, we are economical. We concentrate on a very simple
economy:
one with only two factors of production (land and labour),
which
is only interested in producing and consuming two goods (food
(+fibre); clothes (+ shelter)). These two goods, which
can
be thought of composites as indicated, comprise all the necessities of
life, and are all this simple economy produces, or, for the present,
wants
to produce. It is self contained and self-sufficient as a whole.
Our economy is a self-contained collection of producers and
consumers
- everyone is either one or both.
Notice - we are talking of an economy here - which
might
be a country, or a region, or a community or locality or village, or
whatever.
In the limit, such an economy could be as small as a self-sufficient,
single
and subsistence household. It doesn't matter how big or small it
is. All that matters - for the moment - is that it is
self-contained.
We will come to what can happen when two such economies meet and trade
with each other below. For the present, we just consider the
logic
of this single and simple economy as separate and self contained
entity.
What options does our economy have?
- to produce food (and fibre), or clothes, or (more likely) a
mixture of
the two.
- to consume (use) food and fibre or clothes, or almost certainly a
mixture
of the two.
What determines how much of each to produce and consume? The
supply
and demand curves for each of food & fibre and of clothes.
But
these curves only represent the relationships between the price of each
good and the quantities produced and consumed. We need a way of
thinking
about and comparing (trading-off) both goods together.
How might we do that? Answer: look at the production
possibilities
(the supply side) and the consumption preferences (the demand
side)
for the two goods (which makes up the totality of our simple economy).
The diagram we will use relates production and consumption of one
good
(food (and fibre)) to the production and consumption of the other
(clothes
(and shelter)). So we measure (illustrate) quantities of
each
good on the two axes: quantity of clothes on the vertical axis
and
food on the horizontal axis - though it could just as easily be the
other
way round, it doesn't matter. Get a bit of paper and draw
this
diagram for yourselves now. Then read the following and trace the
argument (logic) out on your diagram as you follow it through.
The supply side:
Consider the production or supply side first. What
options
does our economy have? To use all available production factors
(land
and labour) to produce food; or to use all its factors to produce
clothes; or to produce some combination of the two goods. And, because
our citizens are sensible, they will organise themselves to produce as
much as possible of each good. What? What about leisure and
living? Don't they take time and effort? Yes, so our
production
possibility set will represent the quantities of the two goods our
citizens
are prepared to, are willing to produce, given that any
production
involves use of scarce (limited) time and effort, for which there are
competing
leisure (consumption) and recuperation (investment - see below) demands
So, there is some upper limit to the amount (quantity) of
each
good our citizens are prepared to produce in this economy. We can
mark these two upper limits (F* and C*) on each of the axes
of our diagram of the economy. Producing F* means that will not
produce
any C at all, so quantity of C is zero when Food production is at F*,
and
vice
versa. OK?
But neither of these extremes is likely to be a sensible choice for
our people - they are much more likely to choose a combination of the
two
goods. What are the production possibilities for mixtures of the
two goods? Suppose we start with the economy producing all food
and
no clothes (at point F*), and now ask ourselves how much
clothing
this economy could produce if it diverted some of its resources from
food
to clothes production. How much food production would have to be
given up to produce the first few units of clothes? Probably not
very much, since some factors of production (land and labour) is not
very
good for food production and would be better at producing
clothes.
Furthermore, some of our people would prefer to make clothes
than
produce food, so are likely to be better at producing clothes than
food.
So, to begin with, moving from F* upwards and to the left to produce
more clothes and less food, our economy could gain quite a lot of
clothes
without having to give up much food production. Eventually,
though,
as we progressively cut back on food production in order to produce
more
clothes, we will find that we are having to give up more and more food
for each extra unit of clothing production - as the extra
resources
we need to produce clothes are progressively better at producing food
than
clothes. Eventually, we would wind up producing all clothes and
no
food - at point C*.
So,
our
production possibility relationship will be curved between F* and
C*.
Make sure you follow this logic and the representation of it as the production
possibility frontier (PPF) on the diagram . This
should
be what you got on your own diagram as you followed the argument
through.
If you didn't, why not? Notice, it is frontier because
this
curve represents the maximum possible combinations of food and clothes
that our citizens are willing to produce, given the land, skills,
technologies
and work preferences they have.
Notice, too, what this PPF means. Suppose we start at point C*
and then ask how many clothes we have to give up to produce some
food.
Move along the PPF, and watch how much extra food we get as we
give
up limited quantities of clothes. At first, we only have to give up a
little
clothes for a lot of food - the slope of the PPF is quite flat.
In
other words, the supply price (cost) of more food in terms of clothes
given
up (the opportunity cost, which here is the total cost
of
food production) is low.
But, as we progress down the PPF, the real cost of
food
(its cost relative to everything else in the economy, which in
our
case is clothes) increases - the slope of the PPF gets steeper.
The
cost of food production increases the more food we try and produce - the
real supply curve for food slopes upwards.
Repeat this argument (logic) for the price of clothes in terms of
food
- you will get the same answer - the real supply curve of clothes
also slopes upwards: the more we want to produce, the higher the cost
in
terms of foregone food production - the higher the real (relative) cost
of clothes.
PPF Conclusions:
- The PPF shows the full employment capacity of the
economy: inside
it means unemployment; outside it is impossible (unless, that is,
we
add to the capacity of the economy - see below)
- So, it also shows the maximum real income our
economy
can generate,
in terms of food and clothes mixtures. Our producers are here
not producing these things just for fun, they are producing them
because
they and their neighbours want them - the products are their income,
their
return for the work they do.
- The slope of the PPF measures the real supply
price
(the
real cost) of producing both goods.
- The supply curves for both products slope upwards
- greater
quantities supplied cost more per unit.
How do we add to the capacity of the economy, and thus increase
incomes?
Any
and all of the following things will increase the capacity of our
economy,
and also increase incomes. Any and all these things will shift the
PPF
outwards (up and to the right).
- By "investing in human capital" - improving the skills and
productivity
of our people - the labour, (and the consumers), or simply having more
people.
- By investing in land to make it more productive (draining
it
etc.)
- By improving the effectiveness of our production systems -
getting more
out for the same level of land and labour input - improving
efficiency,
which means one or both of better management (ideally less
management,
since management by itself produces nothing), and better
technologies.
- By investing in capital (tools, plant and equipment)
which
labour
can use with the land to produce the goods.
- By combining these things so that work (production) becomes more
fun
and
more respectable, so that people are more willing to work than before
(a
point seldom, if ever recognised in the textbooks)
What does investment mean here? It means diverting
resources
from the production of food and clothes for current consumption to the
production of "capital" - a stock of new and better resources for
future
production or consumption. So, it is production and use of
another
good - capital. I can't draw three dimensional diagrams very
well,
and you can't read them very well either, I expect. So, for the
present,
we will ignore this complication, or, if you like, consider that part
of
both food and clothing production involves producing capital.
Each
must, actually, since food production requires seed and breeding
livestock
- capital, and clothes and shelter are produced in one period but
expected
to last for longer than one period. This simplification does not
materially affect the basic logic, the basic principles.
The demand side:
What about the consumption or demand side? Now we have
to think about how to represent consumer choices about how much of each
(food and clothes) they would like to have and enjoy. Go back to
your paper diagram. Start with some mix of the two which
represents
one
particular (and observable) choice (F1 of food and C1 of clothes) -
a point (x) which will be in the middle of our diagram somewhere
- it doesn't really matter exactly where. But, if you are drawing this
on the diagram with the PPF on it (which you should now have labelled),
you
had better put your x somewhere on this frontier,
hadn't
you? Why?
Otherwise you will be trying to consume mixes of the two goods you
cannot
possibly produce (x lies outside the PPF).
Or
you will be wasting resources - x lies inside the PPF,
which means leaving people and land unemployed when they could be
working,
and working at something they would like to do, and earning a living,
and
producing something we want, and thus earning respect.
So, put your x on the PPF - anywhere else is daft,
(or,
as economists say, inefficient), so we would not expect people to
choose
it, unless they are so stupid as not to be human. This point x
represents
the one the people in our simple economy choose for themselves - it is
the one we would observe them at, if we could find this simple economy
to look at.
Now ask yourself how the consumers in the economy might judge other
combinations or mixes of the two goods that they might have chosen
instead
of x (F1 and C1)? How might they compare other possible points on
this diagram with x?
Within reason, more of each good would typically be considered
preferable
to less of each of the two goods, especially as we have included
capital
in each, - right? So we can identify the north east quadrant (all
points above and to the right of point x) as a preferred
set or zone of possible consumption mixes or 'baskets' of goods.
Draw this zone on your diagram now. And the south west quadrant
(all
points or good combinations consisting of less and F1 food and C1
clothes)
will be considered inferior choices or combinations for our
consumer
population. Otherwise they would have chosen one of the points in
this zone, and they did not. Shade in this inferior zone in now.
So, somewhere in the top left (north west) and bottom right (south
east)
quadrants will lie a boundary which separates the preferred set
of consumption mixes from the inferior set, compared with our initial
combination
x.
There will be a separation between mixes which are preferred and mixes
of goods which are considered inferior - a separation zone or boundary
along which our citizens cannot make up their minds about which mix is
better and which worse - they are, in effect, indifferent between any
of
the mixes defined by this boundary or indiference zone.
This boundary will (has to) slope downwards and to the right,
passing through our reference point, x. So, draw such a
boundary
on your diagram.
You have just drawn what economists call an indifference curve
(or boundary) (let's label it I2) which indicates all those
combinations
of food and clothes which the consumers cannot judge to either worse or
better than the one they chose initially (x) - they are indifferent
between
any of the combinations which lie on this boundary or curve. So,
you can now extend the shading of both the preferred zone and the
inferior
zone up to this boundary. Got that? If not, go back and
re-read
the logic and re-draw your own diagram.
You should
have got
(most of) this diagram. But you didn't get three curves, you only
got I2. So what are the other curves? Well, what we are
drawing
here is a map of consumer preferences. The further north
east
we go this map, the more preferable the bundles of goods become -
bundles
to the north east of x have a higher value to the consumers than
bundles
to the south west. The indifference curve we have drawn is a
contour
line on this preference "hill" - a line joining together all those
points
(bundles of the two goods) which are considered of equal value by the
consumers,
the citizens of our economy. So there are as many other contour
lines
as we care to draw on this preference map. I have just drawn in
two
others, of lower value than I2, so I have labeled them I1 and Io
respectively.
Now go back to point x. Ask yourself how much food our
citizens would be willing to give up in exchange for a little more
clothes
- move upwards and to the left of point x along the
indifference
curve, I2.
Why along the curve? Because, if we move upwards and to the
right
of this curve, we are assuming that our consumers consider themselves
to
have suddenly become richer. How come? Because they can get
to a preferred mix of both goods anywhere above and to the right of I2
- (I2 marks the boundary between the preferred set of goods and the set
considered inferior.) They choose x - because they could not get
any mix of goods above and to the right (outside) I2. If they
could
have, they would have, and x would be in a different place than we
supposed.
[This sort of analysis is known, in the textbooks as revealed
preference
theory for this reason - the choices people actually make reveal
their
preferences for what they want, and about how much effort they are
prepared
to put in to get it]
Indifference Curve Conclusions:
An indifference curve also shows a constant real income level
for our economy, where income is now defined as command over
consumption
(and investment) mixes ("demand income"), rather than as the returns
from
production. Note, again, that this is not a distinction that the
textbooks identify. Why not? The answer takes us into some
even deeper conceptual water than we are already in, and I don't think
is necessary here.
So, if we want to know how much food our
consumers
will be prepared to give up (pay) for an additional quantity of
clothes,
we had better hold their demand incomes constant - otherwise we will
confuse
ourselves about why they are willing to pay more or less for more
clothes.
So we move up the indifference curve I2. As we do so, what do we
see? That our consumers are willing to give up progressively less
and less food for more and more clothes. The indifference curve
gets
steeper. The more clothes they want, the less food they are
prepared
to trade (pay) for them, the demand curve for clothes is downward
sloping.
Alternatively, move down the indifference curve from point x.
The consumers are willing to give up less and less clothes for more and
more food. The indifference curve gets flatter. The more
food
they want the lower the price in terms of clothes (the real price) they
are prepared to pay. The demand curve for food is downward
sloping.
The slope of the Indifference Curve shows the real
demand
prices (the prices consumers are willing to pay) for the two goods.
These
are indeed real prices - each is priced relative to the other
(which
is all there is in this economy).
General Market equilibrium: the PPF meets the Indifference
Curve. (or the lecturer meets the class? Sorry, couldn't
resist
that). We have now isolated the fundamental dilemma for our
simple
economy: how can we reconcile the production value of goods, as
the things our people are prepared to do for others in return for
income
or payment, represented by the PPF, with the consumption value
of
goods, as the values people attach to consuming or having the goods for
themselves, represented by the indifference curve?
We have already seen the partial answer to this question - the
intersection
of supply and demand curves in a single-good market. As the markets
(the
possible trade-offs) for each of the two goods settle down to their
equilibrium
positions, each will settle on a particular quantity and a particular
price
- at which the supply cost equals the demand price (where the supply
curve
and demand curve intersect). Where will this equilibrium quantity
mix (of food and clothes) be on our production possibility frontier
(PPF)
and consumer preference map (indifference curve map) diagram?
What
combinations (quantities) of the two goods would you expect this single
economy to choose? Think, before you read on.
Answer: first, it has to be a mix that our citizens are willing to
produce
- so the combination has to lie somewhere on the PPF. But where?
Where the consumers think they are getting the best value from their
consumption
- i.e. as high up the preference map as possible - on the highest
possible indifference contour or curve. Which is a single unique
point (X) as a combination of C1 clothes and F1 food. This
economy,
or community, cannot do better than this on its own.
We should expect a sensible, coherent and communicative, and
cooperative
community to come up with this, given time and no interference from
anywhere
else. This is how we would expect people to learn to behave, if
left
to themselves. What? No, you wouldn't expect this?
They
will fight and bicker? They will steal and thieve? They
will
behave like children, then? They won't grow up and be sensible
and
wise? Why not, if we leave them alone, wouldn't we expect them to
grow up and learn from their mistakes and work out how to do things
better?
Isn't this what humans do, if we leave them alone? If they don't,
they will wipe each other out. These people, in case you hadn't
noticed,
are our ancestors - so they didn't wipe themselves out.
OK,
so I
have altered the shape of the PPF here - the reason will become obvious
in a minute. For the present, just notice that this different
shape
reflects the capacity of the community, and its willingness to work at
these particular activities - this one is better at producing clothes
than
food compared to the previous one. Why? because it has more
labour and less land, perhaps, and clothing (and shelter) production is
more labour intensive and less land intensive than food and fibre
production.
At this unique point, this single optimum combination of
food
and clothes, the indifference curve and the PPF will be tangential to
each
other - they will have the same slopes. In other words,
at
this point, the rate at which consumers are willing to give up one good
in terms of the other (the slope of the indifference curve), which is
the
consumer demand price for each good, will equal the rate at which it is
possible to supply one good in terms of the other - the supply cost of
each good - the slope of the PPF. At this point, and this point
alone,
the production value of the two goods will equal the consumption value.
What are these rates? They are the real (relative) prices of
each
good in terms of the other. The supply prices are equal to
the
demand prices at this general equilibrium in our two markets.
And the price ratio of one good in terms of the other is the slope of
the
tangent - the ratio of C0 to F0 in the diagram opposite - the
supply
price ratio of the slope of the PPF equals the demand price ratio of
the
indifference curve. So, this country's markets will settle down
at
a general equilibrium of producing and consuming at point X, =
C1
of clothes and F1 of food.
General Equilibrium Conclusion:
Markets can achieve the best of all possible worlds, in the real
world in which we live. This is a fact of logic not
just
an assertion or an assumption. It is true in principle.
And we, as humans, are uniquely capable of turning our principles into
practice - that is what we do that makes us different from the
animals.
If the real world does not live up to this principle in its practice,
then
we will work to understand why, and then work to fix it. This is
science and reason. Anything else is idle speculation or
fantasy.
Simple, isn't it? Tough, isn't it? Is this why people don't
like economics?
Implication:
The market system rewards the owners of the factors of production
- those who have the most land, the most capital and the labour skills
best fitted, most well matched to the wants of society (the consumer)
will
earn the most production income, and thus get to exercise the most
money
votes about what is produced. If you (land, labour,
capital,
or management) are useless, you won't get paid in this system, and you
won't get the chance to exercise your consumption income. To him that
hath
shall be given - from those who are most able, but not
(necessarily)
to those who are considered most deserving.
So we would also expect our sensible human community to show some
humanity
and seek to soften the harsh realities of natural selection (since that
is what this system really is). Our community will also develop governance
and redistribution (care) systems alongside its
market
systems. Why? Because, some form of government is an essential
complement
to this trading system - the long arm of the law is necessarily
attached
to Adam Smith's invisible hand of the market - to outlaw theft, enforce
contracts and protect property rights (whether these are common rights
or private rights). Once in place, such governments will also
become
responsible for managing the natural selection of the market -
including
acting as judge to redistribute losses and gains, and protect or
support
the less well off. The humane economy will naturally develop
gifts
from those who have to those who have not, which will be outside the
system
of exchange portrayed here. But not independent of it, since the
capacity
to give depends on the resources one can accumulate and incomes one can
generate.
We have not concentrated on either the sociology or the politics of
our economy, our community, here - because this is an economics
course.
But it is nonsense to pretend that these aspects of humanity do not
exist,
or that economics is fundamentally different and separated from
them.
They have to fit, and the way they fit is through the governance (or
management,
if you prefer) of the market system.
Finally - the benefits of Trade.
Now, at last, we are in a position to look at the benefits from
trade.
Suppose, now, we have another community (or country, if you
prefer).
This second country - country 2 - is practically identical to country 1
except that it has more land and less labour. Otherwise the mix
of
skills and preferences are identical. The PPF for country 2 shows
that the country is better at food production and not so good at
clothing
production as country 1. But the preference maps are identical
for
the two countries. On its own, then, country 2 would choose to
produce
and consume C2 clothes and F2 food, at a real price ratio of C3/F3.

Now suppose you are a trader. You have an opportunity to do
business
between these two countries. What are you going to do? Buy
clothes where they are cheap and sell them where they are expensive,
and
the same thing for food. And where is food cheap? In
country
2 - you don't have to pay a much in clothes in country 2 as you do in
country
1. And clothes are cheap in country 1. So there is money to
be made shipping food from country 2 to 1 and clothes from 1 to 2 -
right?
Just think about the meaning of the slopes of the "price lines" in each
country - they show the price of one good in terms of the other.
And what happens when we start to trade - exporting food from 2 to 1
and clothes from 1 to 2? Remember the results of the last
session?
The price of food will rise in country 2 (the food exporter), and thus
the price of clothes will fall in 2. Country 2's "price line" (C3
to F3) will get steeper. The opposite will happen in country 1 -
the line C0 - F0 will get flatter.
And what will limit this process of price changes as a consequence
of
trade between to two countries? Again, from the previous session
- the free trade or "world price" will be the same in each country -
the
slopes of the price lines will be the same, flatter than 1's and
steeper
than 2's. The trading price line will lie between the price lines
of the two countries, as in the figure below (Ce - Fe). I have omitted
the previous no-trade price lines from these diagrams, to make them
clearer.
But you should be able to re-draw these for yourselves.

So what? At this price ratio, country 1's optimum consumption
point
is now C1c of clothes and C1f of food. This is where the trade
price
line touches the highest possible indifference curve. A higher
indifference
curve than it can possibly get to without trade - a higher consumer or
demand income - so it is definitely better off with trade.
How does it manage to consume this amount of food (which is more
than
it could possibly produce itself in this diagram - C1f lies outside the
PPF)? Answer - it imports food, and pays for these
imports
with exports of clothes.
How much food and clothes would it pay country 1 to produce?
Where
the trade price line is the same slope as (lies tangential to) the PPF
- since the slope of the PPF shows the supply price ratio of the two
goods
- the price ratio which matches the opportunity costs of producing each
of the goods. So, country 1 produces P1c of clothes, and P1f of
food,
and trades (P1c - C1c) clothes for (C1f - P1f) food.
The exports [production minus consumption] of clothes pays for the
imports
(consumption minus production) of food, at the trading price ratio
between
the two products. And country 1 is clearly better off with trade
than without it, since it can now consume above (beyond) the limits of
its production possibilities. The same arguments apply to country
2. Follow them through for country 2 for yourselves.
Conclusions from Trade:
- Country 1 is said to have a comparative advantage in
clothing
production
- it can produce clothes relatively cheaply in terms of food,
whereas
country 2 has a comparative advantage in food production. Notice,
importantly, that one of these countries could be absolutely
better at producing both goods - able to produce both more food and
more clothes per person or per hectare. But this would make absolutely
no difference to its comparative advantage. Unless both
countries
are absolutely identical (in which case their real prices would also be
identical, and there would be no gain from trade, and thus no trade) ,
one must have a comparative advantage in one good and the other
must
have a comparative advantage in the other good - fact of logic;
mathematical
certainty; law of human nature - call it what you like.
- In particular - there is no way that one country can
possibly
have
a comparative advantage in the production of both goods.
Having a comparative advantage in one good automatically means
that
the country has comparative disadvantage in the other. This
result is perfectly general - it holds however many goods we might like
to consider - any country will have a comparative advantage in
something
- something which it is relatively good at compared with all the other
things it might be able to do.
- Trade allows these countries to exploit their
comparative advantages,
buying (importing) things which are relatively cheap from elsewhere and
paying for these imports with exports of things which are relatively
cheap
in this country, and thus relatively expensive elsewhere.
- It will pay countries to specialise in the things which
they
are
relatively good at - the things in which they have a comparative
advantage.
Country 1 here specialises in clothes - producing more than it is
willing
to consume, and country 2 specialises in food (& fibre) production.
- Trade prices equalise between countries as trade occurs,
which encourage
the appropriate supply and demand responses to exploit these
opportunities
for specialisation
- The results of this logical analysis are unambiguous
-
trade
pays and is of benefit to everyone. There is no doubt about this
- it is a fact of logic - it stands to reason. Not believing
this
is exactly equivalent to not believing that the earth is round and goes
round the sun - it is daft, nonsensical, illogical, without foundation.
- It is also, I argue, a fact of life as well as a fact of logic -
because
the principle of specialisation and trade according to comparative
advantage
is a basic principle of evolution and natural selection. Rabbits
don't try to be wolves - they get better at being rabbits, and working
better with the resources and conditions in which they find themselves.
This is how natural ecosystems work, as well as how markets work.
But this is another story.
Why, then, is there apparently so much resistance to the idea of
economics,
markets and, especially, free trade? Well, what do you think? Stop
and
consider this question and your answers before we deal with this in
class.
Back
to Contents.
7. Macroeconomic
Basics
- the Circular Flow of Income (CFoI) - also applies to regional
economies.
Simplify the whole economy as an interaction between Consumers
(households),
Producers (firms), and Government. NOTE: This is a
circular
flow of INCOME (and spending) - although measured and identified in
money
terms, it is the livings (income and spending) - the real
purchasing
power of the money - which is important here. Always refer to the
flow as an INCOME flow and not a flow of money.
- Consumption (C) is spending on goods and services for
final
use
(consumption) during this period.
- Investment (I) - an injection into the
CFoI -
is the
purchase of actual physical capital (equipment etc.), or the
improvement
of peoples skills and expertise - final spending on things which are
intended
to increase income levels in future periods rather than this
one.
[Please Note: Firms are responsible for most of this investment,
not governments, though some government spending is investment for
future
periods rather than spending on current (this year's) goods and
services]
- Saving (S) is just and only income which is NOT spent on
final goods
and services. (= Yd - C) - a withdrawal from the CFoI. [Please
Note: Investment spending is matched with Savings through the
financial
and money markets (see below), which are separate from this
Circular Flow of INCOME picture of the economy]
- Government Spending (G) is ONLY spending on final goods
and
services
(wages and salaries, paper, power, building maintenance and improvement
etc.) used up in this period or intended for use in future periods
(includes
any government investment) - an injection into the CFoI
- The other (major) part of total government expenditure is Transfer
Payments:
social security, unemployment benefit, public (national) pension
payments
etc. which simply add directly to the recipients incomes, and
which
are not paid in return for actual services.
- Taxes are the government reciepts - actually also raised
on
the
spending loop (VAT, excise duties), as well as on income streams
(income
and corporation taxes) - T is best thought of as total taxes
minus
transfer payments - a withdrawal from the CFoI
- Exports of goods and services provide income for firms,
and
also
measure this part of total output of the economy - an injection
into the CFoI
- Imports of goods and services leak income out of the
national (domestic)
flow of income - a withdrawal from the CFoI
- Total Expenditure equals Output (C + I + G + X - IM) equals
Income
(called
Gross Domestic Product) (Y) which equals Disposable Income (Yd) plus
Taxes.
NOTE: Necessary Accounting equality (Total Expenditure =
Income)
over any one period (one year) does not necessarily imply equilibrium.
If Expenditure is growing, then so too will income - and both will be
larger
in the next period. If income is falling, then spending will also
fall, and both will be smaller next period.
Distinguish between
- trend growth (improvement in technology and productivity (outputs
per
unit
inputs)) typically about 2.5 - 3.5% per year
- cyclical growth (or decline) round the trend growth - booms
(strongly
positive
growth rates) and recessions (slower growth rates) or depressions
(negative
growth rates).
Equilibrium Process of the CFoI.
- Increasing Injections (G, I, X) and/or reductions
in Withdrawals (T, S, IM) will increase the CFoI
(increasing
income and output (expenditures) and vice versa.
- Multiplier process - increasing an injection (for
instance)
increases
income, which then leads to further increases in spending and resulting
income
- until income levels have risen sufficiently that new
levels
of withdrawals
equal the new level of injections (increasing incomes tend to lead to
increased
savings, taxes and imports). Y (GDP) will not be in
equilibrium until
resulting Withdrawals balance Injections
Fiscal Policy as a stabiliser of economic cycles:
- Government Fiscal Policy (the balance between G and T) can
influence
equilibrium
Income levels
- Increase G (or reduce T) to counteract a recession
- Reduce G (or increase T) to counteract an unsustainable boom
(income
growth
exceeding full capacity of the economy, which leads to inflation - see
below)
Capacity Limits:
- Total Capacity of the economy to generate output and income
depends on
the quantities of land, labour, management and capital plant and
equipment
available
- When all of these factors of production are fully employed, the
economy
is operating at full capacity. Otherwise, there is unemployment -
the economy could produce more income and output.
- Capacity can be increased by:
- investment in capital plant and
equipment - more
capital for production and output;
- increase in the labour force
participating in
the economy - more employment -> more output & income;
- improvement in technology - more
output &
income from the same amounts of labour and capital through
technological
improvement - better quality and more productive capital;
- improved productivity of labour -
better skilled
and better organised labour increasing the amounts that can be produced
and the income that can be earned;
- structural change- re-organisation
of
resources
among different firms with lower costs, improving management.
- Fiscal Policy (G and T) can affect these
capacity increasing
processes - so should be used with care and caution.
Money and CFoI (and Inflation)
- National Income (GDP) = P x Y
(a
grand sum of millions of price times quantity trades) -
where Y
is real income - in terms of purchasing power over all goods
and
services, and P is the general price level (an index of all
prices
in the economy)
- Money (M) is the medium through which
these trades
take place (notes, coins, and current accounts with banks)
- Money is a STOCK which is exchanged between
different
people and businesses as trades happen
- The FLOW of money round the CFoI is given by
M
x V, where V is the Velocity of Circulation - the number of
times
any one £ changes hands in the course of 1 year.
- MV = PY (the Quantity
equation of
exchange)
always holds - it is the only way of defining and measuring V.
- If V is constant, then PY (nominal or
current
GDP, national
income) can only increase if M increases.
- If Y is fixed by the Capacity Constraint -
at Yf
(full
employment national income), then any increase in MV will lead to an
increase
in P - inflation.
Back to Contents.
8. Money, Interest
and Discounting
The Market for Money (Money market)
Money is used both as a medium of exchange for transactions (active
bank
balances) and also as a store of wealth (idle bank balances).
Demand
for and Supply of Money: The price of money is the interest
rate
- Demand for money (current account bank balances) depends on:
- Income (especially for transactions or active balances)
- Price (the interest rate) especially for idle balances - the
higher the
interest rate, the greater the opportunity cost of holding wealth as
money
rather than as financial or physical assets.
- Money Supply is controlled by the Monetary Authority - the Bank
of
England
(BoE).
- Monetary Policy is decided by the Monetary Policy Committe of the
BoE,
with the objectve of controlling inflation
- either through controlling the Supply of Money directly (which
proves
to
be rather difficult)
- or by setting the base lending (interest) rate of the Bank of
England
to
the commercial banking system - the current system of Monetary policy.
(Setting the interest rate at a new level above r* will automatically
result
in a contraction of the supply of money to match the reduced demand -
since
the BoE, through its function as lender of last resort, implicitly sets
the
supply of money to match its ruling interest rate)
Capital Markets: Balance between Savings and Investment (in new
plant
and equipment etc.)
The rate of interest also influences Savings and Investment - the
balance
in the capital market for loanable (investment) funds
Notice:
If the interest rate (set in the money market) results in I > S,
then there
will be a tendency for the level of National Income (Y) to grow -
increasing
savings (shifting this ceteris paribusSavings supply curve
shifts
to the right as incomes increase) to match the additional
investment.
However, increasing Y might also increase Imports and Taxes - so that
the
imbalance between savings and investment might persist - offset by
imbalances
between G and T, and between IM and X.
Financial and Asset Markets - who owns what bits of existing
capital.
The Stock Market: where already existing shares are swapped
between
people who want more (buyers) and people who want to hold fewer shares
(the sellers). The total stock of shares is pretty well fixed (aside
from
occasional new issues).
The total stock of land is Qf. Whatever the price, this
total
stock cannot be changed (aside from minor changes like draining lakes
etc.)
The sellers are signalling a negative demand for the thing
(land
in this case) - the offer curve (Oc) - the higher the price, the
greater the quantity we might expect present owners to be willing to
sell.
By the same token, all present owners who are
not selling are exhibiting
a positive demand for their stock given present prices. This
positve
demand is labelled the reservation demand (RD) in the
above
figure, which is the mirror image of the offer curve (Oc). What
is not being offered for sale by present owners is being retained (held
onto) - that is, it is being demanded.
The excess demand curve (XD) shows how much more
land present owners and non owners want to own at each price -
more
is demanded over and above present holdings of land as the
price
falls.
The horizontal sum of the reservation demand (RD) and
the excess demand (XD) is the total demand (TD)
for
land, or stock. It is the intersection of this total demand (TD)with
the fixed supply (Sf) which determines the market price for land
(Pe).
The trades we observe in a stock market are those between people who
no longer want to own the stock, for whatever reason, shown by the
offer
curve (Oc) and those who want to own more than they presently
have
(which might be some or none at all) - shown by the demand for
additional
stock (excess demand) labelled XD
above. Offer and XD intersect
at the trading price (Pe) and Qt of land (or stocks and shares) change
hands between buyers and sellers.

When all these trades have been made, the present owners are
now
willing to go on owning land at the present price, and are not willing
to sell any.

Share Prices and Stock Market price movements.
So, what is a stock or share (or piece of land) worth? The simple
answer first - it is worth whatever someone else will pay for it.
The current market price of the share, or piece of land, or any other
physical
asset, is as good an estimate of what it is worth as you can get.
The current price reflects the total demand (reservation and excess
demand)
matched with the fixed available supply. The price will change,
as
in all markets,
only if demand shifts or supply shifts. For land
and stock markets, the shifts in total supply are usually pretty
trivial
compared with the total stock. So it is shifts in demand which
are
critical in determining prices in these stock markets.
What will shift the demand curve for land (or stocks and shares) and
hence change their prices?
- expectations of future annual returns - if these expectations
increase,
then demand for the asset will increase - shift to the right, pushing
up
the asset price
- expectations of future selling price (market price) for the asset
- it
is expected to become more valuable in the future than it is now -
which
also pushes up the current market price
The two values are related because the market price can be interpreted
as the market buyers expectations of future earnings or returns.
- The market price of an asset (P) is the present value of
its expected
future earnings stream, as anticipated by the people trading the
asset
in the stock market.
- This present value discounts future earnings because:
- we have to wait to get them - the risk-free rate or return or
discount
rate (r)
- we need to cover the expected inflation rate in the future (p)
- we need a premium to cover the uncertainty (risk) associated
with this
future stream (u)
- The discount rate (or interest rate) i can thus
be
thought
of as being made up of three components: the real risk-free rate of
return
(r), the expected inflation rate (p) and the risk premium (u).
- For any perpetual asset - whose returns are expected
to
continue
indefinitely at some fixed value (R) - the Present Value = R/i
The key relationships can be illustrated through this perpetual asset:
PV
= R/i = Market Price of the asset:
- If the return is fixed (assumed to be known and given) at R, then
an
increase
in the price of the asset implies a lower rate of return (as a % annual
payment) - as asset prices increase, their internal rates of return
fall (other things being equal)
- If returns are expected to increase, then we would expect the
price of
the asset to increase, given the discount rate as the opportunity cost
of capital - the rate of return we can earn on other alternative assets.
- If the interest rate in the economy increases, then the
opportunity
cost
of capital increases, and asset prices will fall.
So, if a particular company discovers a new recipe for making profits,
its annual returns (R) will be expected to increase, and its share
price
will increase until the internal rate of return falls back in line with
the market rate of interest - given the risk and inflation element of
the
company. Conversely, if the company falls on hard times, because
its market is shrinking or because it is being badly managed, its
returns
will fall and its share price will fall as well, until the internal
rate
of return is once more in line with the market rate.
Suppose we do not expect rents to remain constant in the
future.
What might they do? They might be expected to increase (or fall)
by some average and constant amount each year (say plus or minus £A
per year). In this case, the relevant sum for the present value
of
this stream of future rents (annual returns) becomes:
PV = R/i + A/i2 , where R is the basic rent
or annual return (expected this year) and A is the amount by which we
expect
this annual return to change each year in the future, and i is the
discount
rate (the opportunity cost of capital - what we could earn elsewhere,
investing
in something else). So, if we expect returns to fall, the present
value is reduced compared with the simple sum which assumes the return
stays constant. But, if we expect returns to increase, then the
present
value increases, too.
Or, we might expect a continual percentage change in the annual
return,
say plus or minus g% per year. In this case, the PV sum
becomes:
PV = R/(i - g), so that, if the expected growth rate (g) in
the returns on this asset are higher than the opportunity cost of
capital
(i), the present value for this asset goes to infinity: there
is
no price it is not worth paying for such an asset - which is an
explanation
of why share prices shoot upwards for companies expected to do very
well
in the future.
Depreciating assets - ones that wear out.
So, how do we account for the fact that physical plant and equipment
wears out and becomes obsolete? By making an allowance for the
depreciation
of the asset - the continual re-investment necessary to maintain it in
a non-depreciating state. Suppose that this depreciation rate is
d%.
The gross return we need to get from this asset needs to cover this
depreciation
rate, so the net return we need to get on any depreciating asset is the
gross return minus the estimated depreciation rate. So, the gross
return we expect to get should be i = r + p + u + d on these
assets.
Back to Contents.
SEE HERE for the final steps in the story of
the CIRCULAR FLOW OF INCOME - THE BALANCE BETWEEN IMPORTS & EXPORTS
AND THE FOREIGN EXCHANGE (ForEx) MARKET, AND IMPLICATIONS FOR
MACRO-ECONOMIC MANAGEMENT.
Back to Index