--%>

Question on lowering the supply

The Reagan Administration introduced new agricultural program named as the Payment-in-Kind Program, in the year of 1983. In order to distinguish how the program worked, let's assume the wheat market. Now assume the government desire to lower the supply of wheat by 25 percent from the free-market equilibrium by paying farmers to withdraw land from production. Though, the payment is made in wheat instead of in dollars--hence the name of the program. The wheat comes from the government's vast reserves that resulted from previous price-support programs. The amount of wheat paid is equivalent to the amount which could have been harvested on the land withdrawn from production. Farmers are free to sell this wheat on the market. How much is produced by farmers now? How much is supplied indirectly to the market by the government? What is the new market price? How much do the farmers gain? Do consumers gain or lose?
Since the free market supply by farmers is 20 billion bushels, the 25 percent reduction needed by the new Payment-In-Kind (PIK) Program would imply that the farmers now generate 15 billion bushels. To encourage farmers to withdraw their land from cultivation, the government have to give them 5 billion bushels, which they sell on the market.
Since the total supply to the market is still 20 billion bushels, the market price does not change; this remains at $4 per bushel. The farmers gain $20 billion, equal to ($4)(5 billion bushels), from the PIK Program, since they incur no costs in supplying the wheat (which they received from the government) to the market. The PIK program does not influence consumers in the wheat market, since they purchase the similar amount at the same price as they did in the free market case.

   Related Questions in Microeconomics

  • Q : Examples of perishable goods I have a

    I have a problem in economics on Examples of perishable goods. Please help me in the following question. Illustrations of perishable goods comprise: (1) The book Carrie reads each and every night before brushing her teeth. (2) The computer Barry emplo

  • Q : Annual total costs When Nostalgia

    When Nostalgia Corporation maximizes profit in its production of Silver Screen DVDs, in that case its annual total costs will be around: (i) $45 million. (ii) $65 million. (iii) $85 million. (iv) $105 million. (v) $125 million. <

  • Q : Equilibrium Market Price by Rate of

    Assume that an existing apartment complicated is predicted to generate a consistent net of $1,250,000 cash flow per year into rent, after deducting all recurring variable costs (for example, taxes, utilities, and maintenance). When th

  • Q : How much loss an industry bear How much

    How much loss can an industry bear? Answer: An industry can bear losses up to its total fixed costs.

  • Q : Experiencing Absolute Poverty When the

    When the minimum amounts of food, clothing and shelter essential for survival absorb all of a family’s income, in that case the family is experiencing: (w) relative poverty. (x) economic shock. (y) financial destitution. (z) absolute poverty.

  • Q : Determine price and quantity when

    When the demand and supply for a good both raise, price: (w) and quantity both rise. (x) and quantity both fall. (y) falls but quantity increases. (z) changes need more information, when quantity rises.

    Q : Problem based on ATC-MR and MC If $4 is

    If $4 is Firm B's profit-maximizing price, its: A) ATC must be $4. B) MC must be $4. C) MR must be $4.  D) MC must be zero. Help me to get

  • Q : Productivity in Oligopolies Oligopolies

    Oligopolies cannot: (w) maximize where MR = MC. (x) differentiate their product. (y) act independently of other firms. (z) make economic profits within the long run. Can someone explain/help me with best solution a

  • Q : Changes in total revenue by price falls

    When the price falls along such demand curve for pizza, in that case total revenue: (w) falls. (x) rises, then falls. (y) rises. (z) does not change.

    Q : Competitive advertising as waste of

    Economists have conventionally concluded which, from the vantage point of society as an entire, competitive advertising in that case: (1) enables consumers to make more efficient economic choices. (2) is a waste of resources. (3) cons