Do you have an absolute advantage and a comparative advantage over a friend?
Q. Do you have an absolute advantage and a comparative advantage over a friend? If so what is it and how? I am just curious on how this works. Thank You.
Asked by mosqueda_cristina - Sun Dec 27 19:03:50 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Sure..I'm bigger...absolute...more pounds. And I weight more ...comparative...higer ratio. BC
Answered by BRYAN C - Sun Dec 27 20:28:12 2009
Q. Do you have an absolute advantage and a comparative advantage over a friend? If so what is it and how? I am just curious on how this works. Thank You.
Asked by mosqueda_cristina - Sun Dec 27 19:03:50 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Sure..I'm bigger...absolute...more pounds. And I weight more ...comparative...higer ratio. BC
Answered by BRYAN C - Sun Dec 27 20:28:12 2009
What is a real life example of comparative versus absolute advantage?
Q. I am trying to compare and contrast comparative and absolute advantage and would like a real life example. OK... please don't answer unless you know what you are talking about (Gonzo)
Asked by Kelly S - Thu Dec 11 07:34:44 2008 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. An example would be... The cost of producing a barrel of oil in the US is 10 labor hours and 12 labor hours in Mexico. The cost of producing a yard of cloth in the US is 12 labor hours and 13 labor hours in Mexico. The United States has absolute advantage in both markets, meaning it is cheaper for us to produce both of these items in terms of labor hours. If the US and Mexico opened trade in the oil and cloth market, the US's relative price for oil would be 10 / 12 = 1 / x x = 1.2 yards of cloth per barrel of oil and the US price for cloth would be: 12 / 10 = 1/x x = .83 barrels of oil per yard of cloth Meanwhile, Mexico's relative prices would be: Oil: 12 / 13 = 1/x x = 1.083 yards of cloth per barrel of oil Cloth: 13 / 12 = 1/ [cont.]
Answered by roodawg - Thu Dec 11 08:28:06 2008
Q. I am trying to compare and contrast comparative and absolute advantage and would like a real life example. OK... please don't answer unless you know what you are talking about (Gonzo)
Asked by Kelly S - Thu Dec 11 07:34:44 2008 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. An example would be... The cost of producing a barrel of oil in the US is 10 labor hours and 12 labor hours in Mexico. The cost of producing a yard of cloth in the US is 12 labor hours and 13 labor hours in Mexico. The United States has absolute advantage in both markets, meaning it is cheaper for us to produce both of these items in terms of labor hours. If the US and Mexico opened trade in the oil and cloth market, the US's relative price for oil would be 10 / 12 = 1 / x x = 1.2 yards of cloth per barrel of oil and the US price for cloth would be: 12 / 10 = 1/x x = .83 barrels of oil per yard of cloth Meanwhile, Mexico's relative prices would be: Oil: 12 / 13 = 1/x x = 1.083 yards of cloth per barrel of oil Cloth: 13 / 12 = 1/ [cont.]
Answered by roodawg - Thu Dec 11 08:28:06 2008
what would happen if a country has an absolute advantage in everything?
Q. If a country has an absolute advantage in everything, can it be self sufficient?
Asked by MZ - Mon Jun 8 20:35:45 2009 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. idkk, that country would rule the world
Answered by d ms - Mon Jun 8 20:43:02 2009
Q. If a country has an absolute advantage in everything, can it be self sufficient?
Asked by MZ - Mon Jun 8 20:35:45 2009 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. idkk, that country would rule the world
Answered by d ms - Mon Jun 8 20:43:02 2009
Can someone please help me? You may want to look up absolute advantage and sel sufficient.?
Q. As a manager of a financial planning business you have two financial planners, Phil and Francis. In an hour, Phil can produce either one financial statement or answer 8 phone calls, while Francis can either produce 2 financial statements or answer 10 phone calls. Does either person have an absolute advantage in producing both products? Should these two planners be self-sufficient (each producing statements and answering phones) or specialize? Be sure to show your work.
Asked by juicy - Fri Jan 11 13:55:03 2008 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Since Francis can answer more telephone calls than Phil and do more financial statements than Phil, Francis has an absolute advantage in producing both products. However, there is incentive to divide the workload once opportunity costs of production differ. The opportunity cost of Phil answering telephone calls is 0.125 (1/8), compared to a higher opportunity cost of 0.2 for Francis (2/10). Therefore, it makes economic sense for Phil to answer the telephone calls, because his opportunity cost of production is lower, and Francis should produce financial statements. Therefore, 8 telephone calls and 2 financial statements are their combined output. This is more than if they worked individually, because the most Phil could produce is 0.5… [cont.]
Answered by Mr Economist - Fri Jan 11 17:39:06 2008
Q. As a manager of a financial planning business you have two financial planners, Phil and Francis. In an hour, Phil can produce either one financial statement or answer 8 phone calls, while Francis can either produce 2 financial statements or answer 10 phone calls. Does either person have an absolute advantage in producing both products? Should these two planners be self-sufficient (each producing statements and answering phones) or specialize? Be sure to show your work.
Asked by juicy - Fri Jan 11 13:55:03 2008 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Since Francis can answer more telephone calls than Phil and do more financial statements than Phil, Francis has an absolute advantage in producing both products. However, there is incentive to divide the workload once opportunity costs of production differ. The opportunity cost of Phil answering telephone calls is 0.125 (1/8), compared to a higher opportunity cost of 0.2 for Francis (2/10). Therefore, it makes economic sense for Phil to answer the telephone calls, because his opportunity cost of production is lower, and Francis should produce financial statements. Therefore, 8 telephone calls and 2 financial statements are their combined output. This is more than if they worked individually, because the most Phil could produce is 0.5… [cont.]
Answered by Mr Economist - Fri Jan 11 17:39:06 2008
If an advanced country has an absolute advantage in everything, should it eliminate trade with smaller cntrys?
Q. If an advanced country has an absolute advantage in the production of everything, it will benefit if it eliminates trade with less developed countries and becomes completely self-sufficient.
Asked by Dan Y - Tue Sep 22 21:51:26 2009 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. ROTFL. No way. think about a big McDonalds. Why do they have more than one person cooking? Isn't there one person who is probably at least as good as all the others in every activity related to cooking? Why not let that person do all the cooking?
Answered by simplicitus - Fri Sep 25 20:56:21 2009
Q. If an advanced country has an absolute advantage in the production of everything, it will benefit if it eliminates trade with less developed countries and becomes completely self-sufficient.
Asked by Dan Y - Tue Sep 22 21:51:26 2009 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. ROTFL. No way. think about a big McDonalds. Why do they have more than one person cooking? Isn't there one person who is probably at least as good as all the others in every activity related to cooking? Why not let that person do all the cooking?
Answered by simplicitus - Fri Sep 25 20:56:21 2009
What're the differences between absolute advantage and comparative advantage? If a country has absolute advant
Q. If a country has absolute advantage, does it must have comparative advantage?
Asked by wzc722 - Mon Sep 17 02:51:15 2007 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Absolute advantage is simply a measurement of the maximum amount of a product that can be produced in a given time frame. The country that can produce the most has the absolute advantage. Comparative advantage, the more important advantage, is where one country can produce a product at a lower (opportunity) cost than another country. For example, if the bundle trade off is 2 apples for every orange for country A, and one apple foregone for every orange in country B, country B has the comparative advantage in orange production, as it only costs them 1 apple per orange. In regards to your second question, just because a country has an absolute advantage does not mean it has the comparative advantage. Hope that helps.
Answered by easymac - Mon Sep 17 05:35:49 2007
Q. If a country has absolute advantage, does it must have comparative advantage?
Asked by wzc722 - Mon Sep 17 02:51:15 2007 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Absolute advantage is simply a measurement of the maximum amount of a product that can be produced in a given time frame. The country that can produce the most has the absolute advantage. Comparative advantage, the more important advantage, is where one country can produce a product at a lower (opportunity) cost than another country. For example, if the bundle trade off is 2 apples for every orange for country A, and one apple foregone for every orange in country B, country B has the comparative advantage in orange production, as it only costs them 1 apple per orange. In regards to your second question, just because a country has an absolute advantage does not mean it has the comparative advantage. Hope that helps.
Answered by easymac - Mon Sep 17 05:35:49 2007
Explanation for Absolute cost advantage and comparative cost advantage?
Q. I am completing an economics assignment at school and need a good theoretical and real world example for both absolute cost advantage and comparative cost advantage. Have seen a few but they are a bit complicated so something simple would be nice. The answers were very helpful below but I also need an example of where it happens in the real world.
Asked by qa_mater - Fri Aug 7 21:47:08 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Let's say there are two goods: chairs and ipods, traded between two countries: USA and Mexico. In the USA chairs cost $5 to make and ipods cost $10. In Mexico chairs cost $8 and ipods cost $24 to make. As you can see the USA has an absolute cost advantage in producing both goods. Here's where it gets tricky. In comparative advantage goods are not priced in terms of money but in terms of the goods that a society can't produce because they chose to produce something else. In the example a chair costs half an ipod in the usa or one third of an ipod in mexico; ipods cost two chairs in the usa and three chairs in mexico. So, despite having an absolute advantage in producing both goods the USA chooses not to produce any chairs but only… [cont.]
Answered by Hubris252 - Fri Aug 7 22:12:05 2009
Q. I am completing an economics assignment at school and need a good theoretical and real world example for both absolute cost advantage and comparative cost advantage. Have seen a few but they are a bit complicated so something simple would be nice. The answers were very helpful below but I also need an example of where it happens in the real world.
Asked by qa_mater - Fri Aug 7 21:47:08 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Let's say there are two goods: chairs and ipods, traded between two countries: USA and Mexico. In the USA chairs cost $5 to make and ipods cost $10. In Mexico chairs cost $8 and ipods cost $24 to make. As you can see the USA has an absolute cost advantage in producing both goods. Here's where it gets tricky. In comparative advantage goods are not priced in terms of money but in terms of the goods that a society can't produce because they chose to produce something else. In the example a chair costs half an ipod in the usa or one third of an ipod in mexico; ipods cost two chairs in the usa and three chairs in mexico. So, despite having an absolute advantage in producing both goods the USA chooses not to produce any chairs but only… [cont.]
Answered by Hubris252 - Fri Aug 7 22:12:05 2009
What's the difference between comparative advantage and absolute advantage?
Q. (Economic's question) an example would be greatly appreciated.
Asked by Roro - Tue Sep 18 00:48:25 2007 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Absolute Advantage means you can produce a good using less resources. Comparative Advantage means you can produce a good at smaller opportunity cost. The standard example is 2 countries and 2 products. Say country A - 1 employee can produce in a week. 2 Cars or 700 shirts Country B 1 employee can produce 1 Car or 300 shirts. Country A has an absolute advantage in Cars and in shirts. But Country B has a Competitive Advantage in Cars as 1 car = 300 shirts to them while 1 car = 350 shirts in Country A.
Answered by JuanB - Tue Sep 18 01:06:55 2007
Q. (Economic's question) an example would be greatly appreciated.
Asked by Roro - Tue Sep 18 00:48:25 2007 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Absolute Advantage means you can produce a good using less resources. Comparative Advantage means you can produce a good at smaller opportunity cost. The standard example is 2 countries and 2 products. Say country A - 1 employee can produce in a week. 2 Cars or 700 shirts Country B 1 employee can produce 1 Car or 300 shirts. Country A has an absolute advantage in Cars and in shirts. But Country B has a Competitive Advantage in Cars as 1 car = 300 shirts to them while 1 car = 350 shirts in Country A.
Answered by JuanB - Tue Sep 18 01:06:55 2007
What theory is better at explaining trade, comparative or absolute advantage?
Q. I think you need both, but the question at hand is which is better?
Asked by amskalabakas - Thu Jan 29 17:46:45 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Comparative advantage is more common and fosters greater trade, so I would say that comparative advantage is a better way to explain trade. From unc.edu: absolute advantage: A country, individual, or firm has an absolute advantage in producing a good if production of the good absorbs fewer resources (or less time, in the case of an individual) than are required in other countries or by other individuals or firms. comparative advantage: A comparative advantage in producing or selling a good is possessed by an individual or country if they experience the lowest opportunity cost in producing the good. The law of comparative advantage: Mutually beneficial exchange is possible whenever relative production costs differ prior to trade.
Answered by Big Mac - Thu Jan 29 18:03:24 2009
Q. I think you need both, but the question at hand is which is better?
Asked by amskalabakas - Thu Jan 29 17:46:45 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Comparative advantage is more common and fosters greater trade, so I would say that comparative advantage is a better way to explain trade. From unc.edu: absolute advantage: A country, individual, or firm has an absolute advantage in producing a good if production of the good absorbs fewer resources (or less time, in the case of an individual) than are required in other countries or by other individuals or firms. comparative advantage: A comparative advantage in producing or selling a good is possessed by an individual or country if they experience the lowest opportunity cost in producing the good. The law of comparative advantage: Mutually beneficial exchange is possible whenever relative production costs differ prior to trade.
Answered by Big Mac - Thu Jan 29 18:03:24 2009
What is the economic different between comparative advantage and absolute advantage?
Q. This is in relation to international trade and specialisation Thankyou
Asked by Barry C - Thu Jun 11 15:47:48 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. comparative advantage is a situation where one person or country can produce a good or service at a lower opportunity cost than another person or country. The opportunity cost is the value of the forgone alternative that was not chosen because something else was chosen. If you have to choose between playing football and basketball and choose football, not being able to play basketball was the opportunity cost of the chose. In general, we say that the opportunity cost is the value of the next best forgone alternative. Now the person with the comparative advantage in producing a good is the person who gives up the least amount of resources to do it. Say you and a partner have a economic project to make. A report has to be types and a… [cont.]
Answered by chris n - Thu Jun 11 16:11:47 2009
Q. This is in relation to international trade and specialisation Thankyou
Asked by Barry C - Thu Jun 11 15:47:48 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. comparative advantage is a situation where one person or country can produce a good or service at a lower opportunity cost than another person or country. The opportunity cost is the value of the forgone alternative that was not chosen because something else was chosen. If you have to choose between playing football and basketball and choose football, not being able to play basketball was the opportunity cost of the chose. In general, we say that the opportunity cost is the value of the next best forgone alternative. Now the person with the comparative advantage in producing a good is the person who gives up the least amount of resources to do it. Say you and a partner have a economic project to make. A report has to be types and a… [cont.]
Answered by chris n - Thu Jun 11 16:11:47 2009
How a country have an absolute advantage in the production of both goods in the two-country, two-good model?
Q. How a country have an absolute advantage in the production of both goods in the two-country, two-good model?
Asked by sung a - Sat Apr 28 18:48:01 2007 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. A country can have an absolute advantage when it can produce at a greater rate than another. This is often the case with well-industrialized nations, who often have much greater production capabilities than a less-industrialized one. For example, if the U.S. can produce 10 jets or 20 cars in a day, and France can only produce 5 jets or 15 cars, U.S. has the absolute advantage in both goods. The U.S. can produce a greater amount in the same amount of time. Comparative advantage, on the other hand, depends on the opprotunity cost of producing something. In the scenario, France has the comparative advantage in cars, since it gives up only 1/3 of a jet to make one car, whereas the U.S. must give up 1/2. This is the basis for trade.
Answered by John H - Sun Apr 29 14:27:40 2007
Q. How a country have an absolute advantage in the production of both goods in the two-country, two-good model?
Asked by sung a - Sat Apr 28 18:48:01 2007 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. A country can have an absolute advantage when it can produce at a greater rate than another. This is often the case with well-industrialized nations, who often have much greater production capabilities than a less-industrialized one. For example, if the U.S. can produce 10 jets or 20 cars in a day, and France can only produce 5 jets or 15 cars, U.S. has the absolute advantage in both goods. The U.S. can produce a greater amount in the same amount of time. Comparative advantage, on the other hand, depends on the opprotunity cost of producing something. In the scenario, France has the comparative advantage in cars, since it gives up only 1/3 of a jet to make one car, whereas the U.S. must give up 1/2. This is the basis for trade.
Answered by John H - Sun Apr 29 14:27:40 2007
Will a country always be an exporter of a good where it has an absolute advantage in production?
Q. Will a country always be an exporter of a good where it has an absolute advantage in production?
Asked by freaking_naj - Fri Oct 10 17:46:10 2008 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. In theory, no. That's the idea behind the notion of comparative advantage. In practice it is less clear. We frequently see examples of comparative advantage trumping absolute advantage within a country. I don't know of any cases between countries. There are a couple of cases which might be examples in agriculture, but since just about every developed country (with the exception of new Zealand and Australia) use subsidies and tariffs to mess around with the agricultural markets, the results do not clearly reflect relative and absolute advantages. Another example that is hard to call is steel. There was a time when Japan's steel mills were so much more efficient than American steel mills, that Japan was able to import coal and iron ore… [cont.]
Answered by simplicitus - Sat Oct 11 22:23:04 2008
Q. Will a country always be an exporter of a good where it has an absolute advantage in production?
Asked by freaking_naj - Fri Oct 10 17:46:10 2008 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. In theory, no. That's the idea behind the notion of comparative advantage. In practice it is less clear. We frequently see examples of comparative advantage trumping absolute advantage within a country. I don't know of any cases between countries. There are a couple of cases which might be examples in agriculture, but since just about every developed country (with the exception of new Zealand and Australia) use subsidies and tariffs to mess around with the agricultural markets, the results do not clearly reflect relative and absolute advantages. Another example that is hard to call is steel. There was a time when Japan's steel mills were so much more efficient than American steel mills, that Japan was able to import coal and iron ore… [cont.]
Answered by simplicitus - Sat Oct 11 22:23:04 2008
WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN COMPARATIVE AND ABSOLUTE ADVANTAGE?
Q. What is the difference between comparative and absolute advantage?
Asked by curtcurban - Thu Feb 12 21:23:49 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Absolute Advantage This is very simple to understand. A country is said to have an absolute advantage in the production of a good or service if they are able to make it at a lower cost than another country. For example, if it costs $20 to make a chair in USA, but only $12 to make the same chair in China, then we would say that the Chinese economy has an absolute advantage in the production of that chair. Therefore we should allow people in China to make these chairs, as the finished product will be cheaper for consumers. If all international trade followed this theory, then production would increasingly be isolated in countries with low wages. Only highly specialised items would be able to be produced in countries with high wages. This… [cont.]
Answered by Walking Away - Thu Feb 12 22:35:03 2009
Q. What is the difference between comparative and absolute advantage?
Asked by curtcurban - Thu Feb 12 21:23:49 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Absolute Advantage This is very simple to understand. A country is said to have an absolute advantage in the production of a good or service if they are able to make it at a lower cost than another country. For example, if it costs $20 to make a chair in USA, but only $12 to make the same chair in China, then we would say that the Chinese economy has an absolute advantage in the production of that chair. Therefore we should allow people in China to make these chairs, as the finished product will be cheaper for consumers. If all international trade followed this theory, then production would increasingly be isolated in countries with low wages. Only highly specialised items would be able to be produced in countries with high wages. This… [cont.]
Answered by Walking Away - Thu Feb 12 22:35:03 2009
what is the difference between comparative advantage and absolute advantage and how do they relate to trade.?
Q. Just curious since the text books i have dont really explain well nor does the teach.
Asked by edward81087 - Fri Jan 27 09:10:49 2006 - - 1 Answers - 1 Comments
A. I think it's best explained with examples. Charlie and John are both stranded on an island. To survive they learned to fish and gather coconuts. Charlie can catch 10 fish in a day and collect 60 coconuts in a day. John can catch 20 fish and and collect 80 coconuts in the same period. John has an absolute advantage over Charlie in both coconut and fish 'production', but that doesn't mean that John should do both and Charlie do nothing. If Charlie and John each focused on their strengths, then Charlie could crank out 60 coconuts in a day and trade his surplus to John for some of his 20 fish. John has a comparative advantage in fishing, while Charlie's is in coconut collection. The shorthand way to remember it it, "Do what you do best, [cont.]
Answered by foreoki12 - Fri Jan 27 17:02:21 2006
Q. Just curious since the text books i have dont really explain well nor does the teach.
Asked by edward81087 - Fri Jan 27 09:10:49 2006 - - 1 Answers - 1 Comments
A. I think it's best explained with examples. Charlie and John are both stranded on an island. To survive they learned to fish and gather coconuts. Charlie can catch 10 fish in a day and collect 60 coconuts in a day. John can catch 20 fish and and collect 80 coconuts in the same period. John has an absolute advantage over Charlie in both coconut and fish 'production', but that doesn't mean that John should do both and Charlie do nothing. If Charlie and John each focused on their strengths, then Charlie could crank out 60 coconuts in a day and trade his surplus to John for some of his 20 fish. John has a comparative advantage in fishing, while Charlie's is in coconut collection. The shorthand way to remember it it, "Do what you do best, [cont.]
Answered by foreoki12 - Fri Jan 27 17:02:21 2006
Why is trade based on comparative advantage rather than on absolute advantage?
Q. Why is trade based on comparative advantage rather than on absolute advantage?
Asked by Nadia Levassuer - Sat Feb 6 00:01:55 2010 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Having a comparative advantage is not the same as being the best at something. In fact, someone can be completely unskilled at doing something, yet still have a comparative advantage at doing it! Absolute Versus Comparative Advantage: The most straightforward case for free trade is that countries have different absolute advantages in producing goods. For example, because of differences in soil and climate, the United States is better at producing wheat than Brazil, and Brazil is better at producing coffee than the United States. Obviously both countries are better off when Americans produce wheat and exchange a portion of it for some of the coffee that Brazilians produce. But does this mean that a country with an absolute advantage in… [cont.]
Answered by Andreas S - Sun Feb 7 00:45:15 2010
Q. Why is trade based on comparative advantage rather than on absolute advantage?
Asked by Nadia Levassuer - Sat Feb 6 00:01:55 2010 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Having a comparative advantage is not the same as being the best at something. In fact, someone can be completely unskilled at doing something, yet still have a comparative advantage at doing it! Absolute Versus Comparative Advantage: The most straightforward case for free trade is that countries have different absolute advantages in producing goods. For example, because of differences in soil and climate, the United States is better at producing wheat than Brazil, and Brazil is better at producing coffee than the United States. Obviously both countries are better off when Americans produce wheat and exchange a portion of it for some of the coffee that Brazilians produce. But does this mean that a country with an absolute advantage in… [cont.]
Answered by Andreas S - Sun Feb 7 00:45:15 2010
can anyone explain the difference between absolute and comparative advantage, giving an example of your answer
Q. can anyone explain the difference between absolute and comparative advantage, giving an example of your answer
Asked by t k - Sun Mar 30 12:56:21 2008 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Wikipedia is your friend:
Answered by simplicitus - Mon Mar 31 23:31:03 2008
Q. can anyone explain the difference between absolute and comparative advantage, giving an example of your answer
Asked by t k - Sun Mar 30 12:56:21 2008 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Wikipedia is your friend:
Answered by simplicitus - Mon Mar 31 23:31:03 2008
can the concept of absolute advantage explain current data on international trade patterns?
Q. can you explain briefly please?
Asked by Omer Erinal - Sun Oct 25 20:20:04 2009 - - 4 Answers - 0 Comments
A. This is a really good and appropriate question for these times. And the answer is yes. As you know, economic theory would state that nations maximize benefit by focusing on areas where they have a comparative advantage. As an example, the US still has an absolute advantage in producing a lot of things, but it still should focus on areas where it has comparative advantage (e.g., making movies, software, etc) and trade for the things where it does not have a comparative advantage. So countries should set trade policies so as to encourage industries where it has a comparative advantage. This is all fine and good but the interesting thing is that it is not nations that make these decisions but private companies. And private companies… [cont.]
Answered by WarrenBB - Sun Oct 25 22:36:16 2009
Q. can you explain briefly please?
Asked by Omer Erinal - Sun Oct 25 20:20:04 2009 - - 4 Answers - 0 Comments
A. This is a really good and appropriate question for these times. And the answer is yes. As you know, economic theory would state that nations maximize benefit by focusing on areas where they have a comparative advantage. As an example, the US still has an absolute advantage in producing a lot of things, but it still should focus on areas where it has comparative advantage (e.g., making movies, software, etc) and trade for the things where it does not have a comparative advantage. So countries should set trade policies so as to encourage industries where it has a comparative advantage. This is all fine and good but the interesting thing is that it is not nations that make these decisions but private companies. And private companies… [cont.]
Answered by WarrenBB - Sun Oct 25 22:36:16 2009
Explain why countries gain from trade even without having an absolute advantage?
Q. Explain why countries gain from trade even without having an absolute advantage?
Asked by janclark2001 - Tue Mar 3 11:14:14 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. comparative advantage is when a country as an advantage producing a certain produce even though it s not an absolute advantage. for example. Country northland and southland both produce food and clothe at full production for clothes FoodClothes Northland5050 Southland200100 TOTAL250150 Production after trade FoodClothes Northland0100 Southland30050 TOTAL300150 Consumption after trade FoodClothes Northland7550 Southland225100 World total300150 even though there was not absolute advantage, they traded and are not consumming outside their production possibility frontier.
Answered by Jean Baptiste P - Tue Mar 3 12:04:32 2009
Q. Explain why countries gain from trade even without having an absolute advantage?
Asked by janclark2001 - Tue Mar 3 11:14:14 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. comparative advantage is when a country as an advantage producing a certain produce even though it s not an absolute advantage. for example. Country northland and southland both produce food and clothe at full production for clothes FoodClothes Northland5050 Southland200100 TOTAL250150 Production after trade FoodClothes Northland0100 Southland30050 TOTAL300150 Consumption after trade FoodClothes Northland7550 Southland225100 World total300150 even though there was not absolute advantage, they traded and are not consumming outside their production possibility frontier.
Answered by Jean Baptiste P - Tue Mar 3 12:04:32 2009
Competitive/absolute advantage in France's economy?
Q. I need help on an econ project. I have searched everywhere and can't find the answer to this question...What products does France have an absolute advantage over/competitive advantage?
Asked by *babycakes* - Mon Jun 1 00:01:00 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. ... and don't forget the wine and the cheese!
Answered by I didn't do it! - Mon Jun 1 00:32:57 2009
Q. I need help on an econ project. I have searched everywhere and can't find the answer to this question...What products does France have an absolute advantage over/competitive advantage?
Asked by *babycakes* - Mon Jun 1 00:01:00 2009 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. ... and don't forget the wine and the cheese!
Answered by I didn't do it! - Mon Jun 1 00:32:57 2009
If one country has an absolute advantage in the production in all commodities,?
Q. a. both b and d b. it can still gain from trade if its production costs are low relative to those of its trading partners c. it should specialize in the production of goods for which it has higher production costs than trading partners d. it should specialize in the production of goods for which it has lower opportunity costs than its trading partners e. it should not trade
Asked by mary - Tue Apr 28 20:11:26 2009 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. d. it should specialize in the production of goods for which it has lower opportunity costs than its trading partners is your best answer
Answered by axesenzon - Tue Apr 28 20:16:16 2009
Q. a. both b and d b. it can still gain from trade if its production costs are low relative to those of its trading partners c. it should specialize in the production of goods for which it has higher production costs than trading partners d. it should specialize in the production of goods for which it has lower opportunity costs than its trading partners e. it should not trade
Asked by mary - Tue Apr 28 20:11:26 2009 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. d. it should specialize in the production of goods for which it has lower opportunity costs than its trading partners is your best answer
Answered by axesenzon - Tue Apr 28 20:16:16 2009
From Yahoo Answer Search: 'Absolute advantage'
Fri Jul 30 03:00:27 2010 [ refresh local cache ]
[Hide]▼
netdugout.com
Sat, 03 Jul 2010 03:38:37 GMT+00:00
NetDugout The Mets won tonight because they could take advantage of those mistakes. Thursday night was an absolute failure, especially offensively, in doing so, ...
community.accilentcapital.com
360px x 640px | 127.90kB
[source page]
Mapping out our property route
nunesmagician.com
Sean Keeley
Mon, 21 Dec 2009 16:25:00 GM
Troy Nunes Is An . Absolute. Magician: An SB Nation Community. Navigation: Jump to content areas: Network Bar & Login; Section Navigation; Main Blog Content; Secondary Sidebar: Links to Recent Stories, FanPosts and FanShots; Masthead ... Syracuse freshman Brandon Triche highlighted the spurt with consecutive 3-pointers that gave the Orange a 51-39 . advantage. at the 15:36 mark of the second half. ...The Orange eventually extended its lead to 16 points. ...
[Hide]▲
