--%>

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 The amount of wheat paid is equivalent to the amount which could have been harvested on the land withdrawn from production.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 : The Debate about Welfare Programs

    Debate over U.S. welfare programs doesn’t focus onto: (w) choices in amounts and types of subsidies for health care. (x) repealing the negative income tax. (y) impacts on efficiency and incentives. (z) social conflicts over redistribution of inc

  • Q : Dependency of prices due to transaction

    Economists frequently refer to “the price” as while each good has only one price. Conversely, prices frequently vary greatly, depending upon where you are, due to: (w) advertising. (x) transaction costs. (y) marketing overhead. (z) poor co

  • Q : Analytic Time-The Short Run I have a

    I have a problem in economics on Analytic Time-The Short Run. Please help me in the following question. Economists classify a time-period in which at least one resource is fixed as: (i) Short run. (ii) Long run. (iii) Production period. (iv) Profit period.

  • Q : Non-discriminating firm with monopsony

    I have a problem in economics on Resources and Products Flow Model. Please help me in the following question. The non-discriminating firm with the monopsony power in labor market confronts a: (1) Wage rate which consistently surpasses the marginal rev

  • Q : Consumption pattern matching demand

    A house-hold maximizes the satisfaction it derives from the given income by: (i) Buying lottery tickets to save more wealth. (ii) The consumption pattern which matches demand prices with the market prices. (iii) Consuming goods and hence every good is enjoyed uniforml

  • Q : Price elasticity of supply while the

    If John Whittler can sell totem poles for $1,800 at all, he markets 60 yearly, but while the price falls to $600 apiece; in that case he is willing to sell only 24 yearly. His price elasticity of supply is: (w) 0.43. (x) 0.86. (y) 1.62. (z) 2.48.

  • Q : Natural barriers to entry in network

    Assume that an equipment or software firm has copyrights and patents which restrict other firms from producing goods embodying its technology, and which the firm is shielded from competition since customers can deal along with each other at lower costs when they utili

  • Q : Efficiency of monopolistic competition

    Defenders of the efficiency of monopolistic competition are mainly persuasive when they insist which: (w) consumers benefit greatly from product differentiation. (x) any inefficiency is far less harmful than that of pure monopoly. (y) pure competition

  • Q : Oligopoly and economic welfare in long

    In an oligopoly, as opposite to monopolistic or pure competition, industry output within the long run is probable to be: (1) lower along with reduced prices. (2) about similar but with higher prices. (3) lower and with higher prices.

  • Q : Hire labor at any amount in purely

    When this purely competitive firm can hire any amount of labor at pre hour wage of $9 per worker, in this given figure, as it will hire: (1) L2 workers. (2) L3 workers. (3) L4 workers. (4) L5 workers. (5) L<