An economic question, hope to be answered

Do you know the story of selling cats?

An antique dealer took a fancy to the cat-feeding saucer of a cat seller and found it to be a valuable antique porcelain.

He stepped forward and pretended to buy a cat, and after negotiating a few dozen yuan of **, he pretended to let the cat eat, and wanted to take away the plate one piece.

The cat dealer stopped him and said, "No, I sold hundreds of cats with this saucer!" ”

Haha, got it? The other party wants to buy three of your pieces for 30 yuan, and may only value one of them.

You give him room to choose and reduce the price to 20 yuan, and the other party is of course happy.

The two pieces you left behind may not be cared for, but what is the value?

So supply and demand are important factors that affect **!

Since you don't want it anymore, it's not worth anything to you.

Since the other party needs one, he will accept each one if you raise it to 20 or even 30.

That's what you're both doing, haha.

It can't be understood that way.

Taking the story to a more extreme level makes it easier to spot the problem.

Let's say you have 10,000 jars, and the buyer says, I want one, buy it for 20 yuan.

You say, hey, you've bought them all.

The buyer said, if you have to sell me all 10,000 pieces, I can't use them, and you have to rent a place to stack them, so you have to put 10,000 yuan on me.

And then, of course, there was no follow-up. The buyer bought only 1 jar, 20 yuan, and left.

When you think about it, isn't this equivalent to me paying 10,000 yuan for the buyer to buy the jars, and then taking back 9,999 from him for nothing, and he still sticks me upside down for 10,000? Good business.

It can be seen that unrealized transactions cannot be used as the basis for pricing and decision-making. It's like if you go to a neighbor's house, you can walk to the opposite door in two steps, or you can go to the moon and land on the moon to his house. Therefore when you enter the door, you say:

Dude, I came to your house this time, and I was going to go around the moon, so I am equivalent to an interstellar traveler coming to you. ^_

Why can't unrealized transactions be used as a basis for valuation? Because the transaction is often irreversible, if it is reversible, then the transaction cannot be completed, and the buyer and seller will think, why should I bother with this? Unless the two parties enter into a repurchase agreement – but that's financing, and there's interest.

Why are transactions often irreversible? Because there are two reasons:

1. The premise of the transaction is that both parties benefit from the transaction, so a trader must be lower than the selling price of the same item at the same time (just like the bank's foreign exchange transaction**);

2. There are transaction costs.

This corresponds to demand and ** theory, that is, pricing.

You are 20 yuan higher than one piece, and other people's demand is reduced by 1 piece.

You are the producer.

The accumulation rate of the first department is 50%, that is, in the first department, 50% of the surplus value is used for reproduction, 121 * 50% =

The institutional capital of the first department becomes 484c:121v=4:1, and the surplus value ratio is 121m:121v=100%, so that at the end of next year, the constant capital investment of the first department is 484c+, the variable capital is 121v+, and the residual value is.

From the conditions for the realization of expanded reproduction, it can be seen that the capital institutions in the second department with the increment of fixed capital investment in the second department become 176:88=2:1, and the surplus value rate is 100%, so at the end of the second year, the fixed capital investment in the second department is 176c+, the variable capital investment is 88v+, and the surplus value is.

Thus, at the end of next year, the composition of the total social products of the two major sectors will be as follows:

The total of 1><2> is 1186

(1) This problem only needs to substitute c 1000, i 600, g 200, y (1000, solution, y 9000

2) I think the point of study in this question is the expenditure multiplier theory. In the three-sector economy, the total expenditure is consumption, investment, and purchase, and the multiplier of these three is 1 1, that is, the marginal propensity to consume, which can be known from the consumption function, let the total expenditure increase x, so that x(1 1) 9000 10, and the solution is obtained, x 180

The second question is a personal opinion, which may not be correct, and I also ask for more advice from the gods of all parties.

Pick B. It can't be sold for good or bad.

You already understand the truth that the seller will only break the watch. That is to say, there will be no 100 yuan watch on the market, only a 90 yuan watch. So how will buyers react to a 90 yuan watch?

When he sees 90 yuan, he will only think that it is a bad watch and think that there are only bad watches on the market, and he is only willing to pay 60 yuan ** to buy. So the deal can't be done.

The market failure here is illustrated with a very simple logical example. This analysis is based on two seemingly unreliable assumptions: 1

Market participants are rational, and buyers don't take a break to spend $90 on something he thinks is only worth $60. 2.The participants are all honest.

The seller will not sell a bad watch for 50 yuan as a good watch for 100 yuan.

You can assume that if the seller is not honest and will sell a bad watch for 50 yuan as a good watch for 100 yuan, what will be the result?

You still don't jump out of the limit of this question, always limit the 2 people in this question In the defective market, the buyer thinks that all the goods are bad, so he will not buy You need to jump out of the limit of these 2 people, you may think that the buyer does not know the good or bad, then he may buy it well

If it's really hard for you to understand, then assume that the buyer has been fooled once and knows that there is a bad table in the market

The test point of the defective market, you can't always think that the market is 2 people Buyers don't know whether it's good or bad, so it's possible to buy good or bad, so you jump back into the normal market range

Choose A. The two-part fee system is divided into ticket costs and entertainment costs, and the analysis generally uses amusement parks as an example: the ticket cost should be equal to its marginal cost, and the entertainment fee should be equal to the consumer surplus of each participant in the entertainment program (the most you are willing to pay for this project), so that the amusement park can get all the consumer surplus and thus maximize profits.

Marginal cost maximizes the total efficiency of society.

Knowing the marginal cost, you can find the cost function, which should be, c is the fixed cost. C can be found based on the total cost of 100 pieces when producing 10 pieces

Profit is equal to the total return function minus the cost, get a binary one-time function about q, and then find the derivation, find the zero point, which is the required profit point, and finally substitute the formula of the total return function minus the total cost.