Suppose that Italy and Austria both produce fish and shoes. Italy’s opportunity cost of producing a pair of shoes is 5 pounds of fish, while Austria’s opportunity cost of producing a pair of shoes is 10 pounds of fish.

By comparing the opportunity cost of producing shoes in the two countries, you can tell that has a comparative advantage in the production of shoes, and has a comparative advantage in the production of fish.

Suppose that Italy and Austria consider trading shoes and fish with each other. Italy can gain from specialization and trade as long as it receives more than of fish for each pair of shoes it exports to Austria. Similarly, Austria can gain from trade as long as it receives more than of shoes for each pound of fish it exports to Italy.

Based on your answers to the previous question, which of the following terms of trade (that is, price of shoes in terms of fish) would allow both Austria and Italy to gain from trade? Check all that apply.

(A) 8 pounds of fish per pair of shoes
(B) 1 pound of fish per pair of shoes
(C) 15 pounds of fish per pair of shoes
(D) 3 pounds of fish per pair of shoes

4. suppose that pollution in a neighborhood comes from two factories, with marginal benefit curves given by mb1 = 12 – p1 and mb2 = 8 – p2. the level of pollution in the neighborhood is given by p = p1 + p2. the government wants to limit pollution by instituting a pollution-rights market. the government’s desired level of p is 10, so it prints 10 pollution rights and offers them for sale to the firms. a)find the equilibrium selling price of a pollution right, as well as the allocation of rights (and hence pollution levels) across the two factories. b)repeat part (a) for the case where the government’s desired level of pollution equals 14. c)comment on the usefulness of a pollution rights market in achieving efficient levels of pollution abatement.

Alandowner and his neighbor purchased adjoining undeveloped lots. after both built homes on their respective lots, the landowner suggested to the neighbor that a common driveway be built where the two lots joined. the neighbor agreed. the landowner and the neighbor split the cost of constructing the driveway and entered into a written agreement to equally share the costs of its upkeep and maintenance. the agreement was recorded in the county recorder's office. two years later, the neighbor built a new driveway located entirely on his lot. the common driveway, which the landowner continued to use but which the neighbor no longer used, began to deteriorate. the landowner asked the neighbor for money to maintain the common driveway, but the neighbor refused to contribute. three years later, the neighbor conveyed his lot to a friend. the friend entered into possession and used only the driveway built by the neighbor. by this time, the common driveway had deteriorated badly and contained numerous potholes. the landowner asked the friend to pay half of what it would take to repair the common driveway. the friend refused. the landowner repaired the driveway and sued the friend for 50% of the cost of repairs. will the landowner prevail?

According to the philosopher immanuel kant, the right of employees to know the nature of the job they are being hired to do and the obligation of a company not to deceive them in this respect is mainly reflective of the basic right of . privac yb. free consentc. freedom of speechd. freedom of consciencee. first refusal