Comments on: An introduction to consumption externalities from a Singapore perceptive http://welkerswikinomics.com/blog/2009/11/17/an-introduction-to-consumption-externalities-from-a-singapore-perceptive/ for students and teachers of AP and IB Economics Wed, 17 Mar 2010 22:34:06 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Gelando Makrides http://welkerswikinomics.com/blog/2009/11/17/an-introduction-to-consumption-externalities-from-a-singapore-perceptive/comment-page-1/#comment-9852 Gelando Makrides Tue, 19 Jan 2010 09:46:24 +0000 http://welkerswikinomics.com/blog/?p=1329#comment-9852 1. It is not banned in every country because the other governments have weighed the marginal social benefits and marginal social costs and they have found other ways to control the costs without completely losing the social benefits, such as the health benefits. Graphically, the intersection of MSB and MSC is placed at a different point than in Singapore, and at a point which still shows necessary benefits from the Chewing Gum market. 2. The government could subsidize public transportation and increase the taxes on oil. There could be improvements to the capital resources and more stops built to increase its effectiveness and make it more accessible.This would encourage public transportation and discourage private transportation, possibly lowering traffic congestion. 1. It is not banned in every country because the other governments have weighed the marginal social benefits and marginal social costs and they have found other ways to control the costs without completely losing the social benefits, such as the health benefits. Graphically, the intersection of MSB and MSC is placed at a different point than in Singapore, and at a point which still shows necessary benefits from the Chewing Gum market.

2. The government could subsidize public transportation and increase the taxes on oil. There could be improvements to the capital resources and more stops built to increase its effectiveness and make it more accessible.This would encourage public transportation and discourage private transportation, possibly lowering traffic congestion.

]]> By: Lara F. http://welkerswikinomics.com/blog/2009/11/17/an-introduction-to-consumption-externalities-from-a-singapore-perceptive/comment-page-1/#comment-9832 Lara F. Mon, 18 Jan 2010 07:26:02 +0000 http://welkerswikinomics.com/blog/?p=1329#comment-9832 What are some possible alternative government interventions to reduce traffic congestion in Singapore? Some possible alternative government interventions are the government could put a tax on petrol, they could make public transportation cheaper, they could make cars more expensive and they could make more public transportation, who comes often and is fast. All of those choices would lead to a decrease in demand for cars and increase in demand for public transportation and reduce traffic. What are some possible alternative government interventions to reduce traffic congestion in Singapore?

Some possible alternative government interventions are the government could put a tax on petrol, they could make public transportation cheaper, they could make cars more expensive and they could make more public transportation, who comes often and is fast. All of those choices would lead to a decrease in demand for cars and increase in demand for public transportation and reduce traffic.

]]> By: Jason http://welkerswikinomics.com/blog/2009/11/17/an-introduction-to-consumption-externalities-from-a-singapore-perceptive/comment-page-1/#comment-9781 Jason Thu, 14 Jan 2010 12:45:49 +0000 http://welkerswikinomics.com/blog/?p=1329#comment-9781 1. Why is chewing gum not banned in every country, if it produces spill over costs? Chewing gum has negative externalities, to be sure, and therefore, its Marginal Social Cost is definitely a problem. However, depending on the country's Marginal Social Benefit, the country might make a different choice. For example, in Singapore, the government has weighed the costs (dirty sidewalks, etc.) and the benefits (happy citizen, good breath) and has decided that in that country, they will ban gum. However, if the benefits are larger in another country (people are especially in need of gum, or are not as willing to stop), the intersection of MSB and MSC will be in a different spot, resulting in a different action by the government. <i> 1. Why is chewing gum not banned in every country, if it produces spill over costs?

Chewing gum has negative externalities, to be sure, and therefore, its Marginal Social Cost is definitely a problem. However, depending on the country’s Marginal Social Benefit, the country might make a different choice. For example, in Singapore, the government has weighed the costs (dirty sidewalks, etc.) and the benefits (happy citizen, good breath) and has decided that in that country, they will ban gum. However, if the benefits are larger in another country (people are especially in need of gum, or are not as willing to stop), the intersection of MSB and MSC will be in a different spot, resulting in a different action by the government.

]]> By: Mhairi Hutchison http://welkerswikinomics.com/blog/2009/11/17/an-introduction-to-consumption-externalities-from-a-singapore-perceptive/comment-page-1/#comment-9775 Mhairi Hutchison Wed, 13 Jan 2010 17:23:37 +0000 http://welkerswikinomics.com/blog/?p=1329#comment-9775 1. Chewing gum is not banned in every country, because it has some benefits as well ,as listed above, by boosting the production of saliva and reduces tooth decay. Not every country see's the spillover costs greater than the benefits. 2. The government could put taxes on petrol so that people would be less willing to pay for it or lower the prices on public transportation so that people would be more inclined to use it. 3. Deodorant can be seen as a positive externality because it benefits not only the consumer, but a third party that was not part of the market transaction. Everyone is happy :) 1. Chewing gum is not banned in every country, because it has some benefits as well ,as listed above, by boosting the production of saliva and reduces tooth decay. Not every country see’s the spillover costs greater than the benefits.

2. The government could put taxes on petrol so that people would be less willing to pay for it or lower the prices on public transportation so that people would be more inclined to use it.

3. Deodorant can be seen as a positive externality because it benefits not only the consumer, but a third party that was not part of the market transaction. Everyone is happy :)

]]> By: Externalities in Singapore | Surbiton High Economics and Business Studies http://welkerswikinomics.com/blog/2009/11/17/an-introduction-to-consumption-externalities-from-a-singapore-perceptive/comment-page-1/#comment-9163 Externalities in Singapore | Surbiton High Economics and Business Studies Thu, 26 Nov 2009 19:57:48 +0000 http://welkerswikinomics.com/blog/?p=1329#comment-9163 [...] http://welkerswikinomics.com/blog/2009/11/17/an-introduction-to-consumption-externalities-from-a-sin... [...] [...] http://welkerswikinomics.com/blog/2009/11/17/an-introduction-to-consumption-externalities-from-a-sin... [...]

]]> By: Asuka Shiraki http://welkerswikinomics.com/blog/2009/11/17/an-introduction-to-consumption-externalities-from-a-singapore-perceptive/comment-page-1/#comment-9088 Asuka Shiraki Mon, 23 Nov 2009 09:07:25 +0000 http://welkerswikinomics.com/blog/?p=1329#comment-9088 1. Chewing gum is not banned in every country even when it produces spill over costs because the chewing gum industry, similar to the tobacco industry, will be severely affected. This includes unhappy shareholders and unemployment. The other reason is that chewing gum is a good source for healthy teeth, as it helps reduce chance of decay. Thus reduces the amount of money used for medical bills. 2. Some possible alternative government interventions include increasing the price of petrol, lowering the price of public transportation, providing education about the dangers of toxic gas emissions from cars, and imposing an import quota on foreign cars. A quota imposes a limit upon the quantity of a good that may be brought into a country or economy over a period of time. 3. The consumption of deodorant will mainly have positive externalities, as when it is consumed, it will provide external benefits to third parties such as the society. -Graph illustrated in notebook- 1. Chewing gum is not banned in every country even when it produces spill over costs because the chewing gum industry, similar to the tobacco industry, will be severely affected. This includes unhappy shareholders and unemployment. The other reason is that chewing gum is a good source for healthy teeth, as it helps reduce chance of decay. Thus reduces the amount of money used for medical bills.

2. Some possible alternative government interventions include increasing the price of petrol, lowering the price of public transportation, providing education about the dangers of toxic gas emissions from cars, and imposing an import quota on foreign cars. A quota imposes a limit upon the quantity of a good that may be brought into a country or economy over a period of time.

3. The consumption of deodorant will mainly have positive externalities, as when it is consumed, it will provide external benefits to third parties such as the society.
-Graph illustrated in notebook-

]]> By: Jakeb Stunz http://welkerswikinomics.com/blog/2009/11/17/an-introduction-to-consumption-externalities-from-a-singapore-perceptive/comment-page-1/#comment-9069 Jakeb Stunz Fri, 20 Nov 2009 01:44:07 +0000 http://welkerswikinomics.com/blog/?p=1329#comment-9069 Jakeb and Einar 1. Because it creates jobs, helps economy, and even improves health by slowing decay for your teeth. 2. By lowering the price of public transportation even more and by adding a tax on oil so less people will fill up their car. Jakeb and Einar

1. Because it creates jobs, helps economy, and even improves health by slowing decay for your teeth.
2. By lowering the price of public transportation even more and by adding a tax on oil so less people will fill up their car.

]]>