At Westonci.ca, we connect you with the answers you need, thanks to our active and informed community. Connect with a community of experts ready to help you find accurate solutions to your questions quickly and efficiently. Get precise and detailed answers to your questions from a knowledgeable community of experts on our Q&A 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.
We appreciate your time. Please come back anytime for the latest information and answers to your questions. Thanks for using our service. We're always here to provide accurate and up-to-date answers to all your queries. Find reliable answers at Westonci.ca. Visit us again for the latest updates and expert advice.
