?Read the following extract from an article about monopolistic competition, and the questions followed.
?For each question 15—20, mark one letter (A, B, C, or D) on your Answer Sheet for the answer you choose.
Is the outcome in a monopolistically competitive market desirable from the standpoint of society as a whole? Can policymakers improve on the market outcome? There are no simple answers to these questions.
One source of inefficiency is the markup of price over marginal cost. Because of the markup, some consumers who value the good at more than the marginal cost of production (but less than the price) will be deterred from buying it. Thus, a monopolistically competitive market has the normal deadweight loss of monopoly pricing.
Although this outcome is clearly undesirable compared to the first-best outcome of price equal to marginal cost, there is no easy way for policymakers to fix the problem. To enforce marginal-cost pricing, policymakers would need to regulate all firms that produce differentiated products. Because such products are so common in the economy, the administrative burden of such regulation would be overwhelming. Moreover, the regulating monopolistic competitors would entail all the problems of regulating natural monopolies. In particular, because monopolistic competitors are making zero profits already, requiring them [% lower their prices to equal marginal cost would cause them to make losses. To keep these firms in business, the government would need to help them cover these losses. Rather than raising taxes to pay for these subsidies, policymakers may decide it is better to live with the inefficiency of monopolistic pricing.
Another way in which monopolistic competition may be socially inefficient is that the number of firms in the market may not be the "ideal" one. That is, there may be too much or too little entry. One way to think about this problem is in terms of the externalities associated with entry. Whenever a new firm considers entering the market with a new product, it considers only the profit it would make. Yet its entry would also have two external effects: a) The product-variety externality: Because consumers get some consumer surplus from the introduction of a new product, there is a positive externality associated with entry; b) The business-stealing externality: Because other firms lose customers and profits from the entry of a new competitor, there is a negative externality associated with entry. Thus in a monopolistically competitive market, there are both positive and negative externalities associated with the entry of new firms. Depending on which externality is larger, a monopolistically competitive market could have either too few or too many products. Both of these externalities are closely related to the conditions for monopolistic competition. The former arises because a new firm would offer a product different from those of the existing firms. The latter arises because firms post a price above marginal cost and, therefore, are always eager to sell additional units. Conversely, because perfectly competitive firms produce identical goods and charge a price equal to marginal cost, neither of these externalities exists under perfect competition.
In the end, we can conclude only that monopolistically competitive markets do not have all the desirable welfare properties of perfectly competitive markets. That is, the invisible hand does not ensure that total surplus is maximized under monopolistic competition. Yet because the inefficiencies are subtle, hard to measure, and hard to fix, there is no easy way for public policy to improve the market outcome.
Who will be prevented from buying the good?
A. Some consumers who also estimate the value of the good at more than the marginal cost of production.
B. Some consumers who estimate the price of the good at more than the marginal cost of the production.
C. Some consumers who have a high opinion of the good at more than the marginal cost of the production.
D. Some consumers who estimate the worth of the good at more than the marginal cost of the production.
There are many ways of dealing with offenders that do not involve the payment of money. One is probation, a system that takes many different forms in different jurisdictions but that essentially involves the suspension of sentence on the offender subject to the condition that he is supervised while living in the community by a probation officer and possibly agrees to comply with such other requirements as the court many think appropriate. Usually, if the offender complies with the probation order and commits no further offense while it is in force, no other penalty is imposed, but if he breaks the requirement of the order or commits another offense, he can be brought back before the court and punished for the original offense as well as the later one. In many U.S. states probation is combined with a suspended sentence, so that the sentence the offender will have to serve if he breaks the order is fixed in advance; in England the sentence is not fixed in advance, and the court has complete discretion if there is a breach to sentence the offender for the original crime in light of his later behaviour English law allows suspended sentence of of imprisonment for a specified period (not more than two years), on condition that the offender commit no further offense during the period of suspension. This is different from a probation order, as no supervision is required and no other conditions may be included in the order.
Other alternatives to prison are based on the idea of preventing an offender from committing further offenses, without necessarily confining him in a prison. The most familiar power of this kind is that of disqualifying an offender from driving a motor vehicle or from holding a driver's license. This power is available under the laws of most countries to deal with those offenders who either commit serious driving offenses, such as driving while intoxicated, or who commit repeated but less serious offenses, such as speeding. In many countries there exists a system in which the offender is awarded a number of poims each time he commits a motoring offense; when the number of points accumulated reaches a certain figure, he is automatically disqualified for a specified period. Some countries allow courts to disqualify from driving those offenders who have used motor vehicles in commission of the crime for which they are being sentenced, with the aim of hindering the offender from committing further such offenses. Although attractive in the abstract, this seldom works well in practice, as the absence of a driver's license may well prevent an offender from finding work after release from prison; as a result he may be likely to commit further crimes. Other forms of disqualification may be imposed on offenders convicted of particular types of crimes: a fraudulent company director may be disqualified from being involved in the direction of a company, a corrupt politician may be disqualified from holding public office, or a parent who sexually abuses his children may be deprived of parental authority over them.
The first paragraph is primarily about ______.
A. ways of dealing with offenders
B. the probation system
C. the suspension of sentence on the offender
D. the suspended sentence of imprisonment
One of the advantages of flexible working hours is that
A. pressure from work can be reduced
B. working women can have more time al, home
C. traffic and commuting problems can be solved
D. personal relationships in offices can be improved