Looking for answers? Westonci.ca is your go-to Q&A platform, offering quick, trustworthy responses from a community of experts. Experience the ease of finding quick and accurate answers to your questions from professionals on our platform. Explore comprehensive solutions to your questions from knowledgeable professionals across various fields on our platform.
Sagot :
To decide whether countries should engage in trade, we need to analyze their opportunity costs and compare them with the terms of trade. Here's a step-by-step analysis:
1. Identify Opportunity Costs:
- Country A: The opportunity cost of producing 1 shoe is 3 peaches.
- Country B: The opportunity cost of producing 1 shoe is 6 peaches.
2. Analyze Terms of Trade:
- Terms of Trade Scenario 1: 5 peaches for 1 shoe.
- Terms of Trade Scenario 2: 2 peaches for 1 shoe.
3. Compare Opportunity Costs with Terms of Trade:
- Scenario 1: 5 peaches for 1 shoe
- Country A: The opportunity cost of producing 1 shoe is 3 peaches.
- Comparison: If Country A trades 1 shoe for 5 peaches, then it receives 5 peaches for a shoe it could produce at an opportunity cost of only 3 peaches. Since 3 peaches < 5 peaches, trading is not beneficial for Country A.
- Country B: The opportunity cost of producing 1 shoe is 6 peaches.
- Comparison: If Country B trades 5 peaches for 1 shoe, it means getting a shoe at a cost of 5 peaches instead of producing it for 6 peaches. Since 6 peaches > 5 peaches, trading is beneficial for Country B.
- Conclusion: According to Scenario 1 (5 peaches for 1 shoe), only Country B would benefit from trading, while Country A would not. This does not fit an ideal trade scenario where both countries should benefit.
- Scenario 2: 2 peaches for 1 shoe
- Country A: The opportunity cost of producing 1 shoe is 3 peaches.
- Comparison: If Country A trades 1 shoe for 2 peaches, it receives fewer peaches than it could produce itself (3 peaches > 2 peaches). Hence, trading is not beneficial for Country A.
- Country B: The opportunity cost of producing 1 shoe is 6 peaches.
- Comparison: If Country B trades 2 peaches for 1 shoe, it means getting a shoe at a cost of 2 peaches instead of 6 peaches. Since 6 peaches > 2 peaches, trading is beneficial for Country B.
- Conclusion: According to Scenario 2 (2 peaches for 1 shoe), Country B benefits more from trading than producing the shoe itself, while Country A does not benefit as it is trading away for a lesser value.
4. Conclusion:
- Both Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 show that Country B benefits from trading, but Country A does not in either scenario. However, the answer should reflect a situation where both countries have an opportunity or a decisive scenario.
Despite the detailed comparison for better understanding, the correct overall answers based on the scenarios are:
- Option c: The countries should trade if the terms of trade were 5 peaches for 1 shoe.
- Option d: The countries should trade if the terms of trade were 2 peaches for 1 shoe.
In essence, for Country A to trade, the terms of trade must be better aligned with their opportunity cost, i.e., receiving more value. Both scenarios give correct trading grounds.
1. Identify Opportunity Costs:
- Country A: The opportunity cost of producing 1 shoe is 3 peaches.
- Country B: The opportunity cost of producing 1 shoe is 6 peaches.
2. Analyze Terms of Trade:
- Terms of Trade Scenario 1: 5 peaches for 1 shoe.
- Terms of Trade Scenario 2: 2 peaches for 1 shoe.
3. Compare Opportunity Costs with Terms of Trade:
- Scenario 1: 5 peaches for 1 shoe
- Country A: The opportunity cost of producing 1 shoe is 3 peaches.
- Comparison: If Country A trades 1 shoe for 5 peaches, then it receives 5 peaches for a shoe it could produce at an opportunity cost of only 3 peaches. Since 3 peaches < 5 peaches, trading is not beneficial for Country A.
- Country B: The opportunity cost of producing 1 shoe is 6 peaches.
- Comparison: If Country B trades 5 peaches for 1 shoe, it means getting a shoe at a cost of 5 peaches instead of producing it for 6 peaches. Since 6 peaches > 5 peaches, trading is beneficial for Country B.
- Conclusion: According to Scenario 1 (5 peaches for 1 shoe), only Country B would benefit from trading, while Country A would not. This does not fit an ideal trade scenario where both countries should benefit.
- Scenario 2: 2 peaches for 1 shoe
- Country A: The opportunity cost of producing 1 shoe is 3 peaches.
- Comparison: If Country A trades 1 shoe for 2 peaches, it receives fewer peaches than it could produce itself (3 peaches > 2 peaches). Hence, trading is not beneficial for Country A.
- Country B: The opportunity cost of producing 1 shoe is 6 peaches.
- Comparison: If Country B trades 2 peaches for 1 shoe, it means getting a shoe at a cost of 2 peaches instead of 6 peaches. Since 6 peaches > 2 peaches, trading is beneficial for Country B.
- Conclusion: According to Scenario 2 (2 peaches for 1 shoe), Country B benefits more from trading than producing the shoe itself, while Country A does not benefit as it is trading away for a lesser value.
4. Conclusion:
- Both Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 show that Country B benefits from trading, but Country A does not in either scenario. However, the answer should reflect a situation where both countries have an opportunity or a decisive scenario.
Despite the detailed comparison for better understanding, the correct overall answers based on the scenarios are:
- Option c: The countries should trade if the terms of trade were 5 peaches for 1 shoe.
- Option d: The countries should trade if the terms of trade were 2 peaches for 1 shoe.
In essence, for Country A to trade, the terms of trade must be better aligned with their opportunity cost, i.e., receiving more value. Both scenarios give correct trading grounds.
Thanks for stopping by. We are committed to providing the best answers for all your questions. See you again soon. Thank you for your visit. We're dedicated to helping you find the information you need, whenever you need it. Keep exploring Westonci.ca for more insightful answers to your questions. We're here to help.
