--%>

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 The amount of wheat paid is equivalent to the amount which could have been harvested on the land withdrawn from production.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 : Relatively price elastic when supply

    Even though a drought decreases supply from S1 to S0, at each point along both of such supply curves, the supply of tanks of dehydrated water: (i) perfectly price elastic. (ii) relatively price elastic. (iii) unitarily price elastic. (iv) relativ

  • Q : Complements for good Can someone help

    Can someone help me in finding out the right answer from the given options. Price hikes outcome less substitution away from a good the more: (i) Close substitutes there are for good. (ii) Various uses there are to which the good was place at lower price. (iii) Extende

  • Q : Decreasing marginal returns and

    What is the difference between decreasing marginal returns and negative marginal returns?

  • Q : Increases in market demand and resource

    If increases in market demand cause resource prices to raise, that resulting in higher average as well as marginal costs, an industry is: (i) experiencing diseconomies of scale. (ii) unprofitable in the long run. (iii) probably a natu

  • Q : Explanation of Substitution Effect The

    The substitution effect helps most in describing why: (1) Demand curves slope down. (2) Goods are either complements or substitutes. (3) Air travel costs less than by walking the cross country. (4) Uncertainty regarding quality justifies govt. control

  • Q : Consumption and saving schedules The

    The consumption and saving schedules demonstrate that: A) consumption rises, but saving declines, as disposable income rises. B) saving varies inversely with the profitability of investment. C) saving varies directly with the level of disposable income. D) saving is i

  • Q : Reform or revision of the welfare system

    The most important reform / revision of the welfare system within the past half century occurred throughout the administration of President as: (1) Richard Nixon [1971]. (2) Jimmy Carter [1978]. (3) Ronald Reagan [1984]. (4) Bill Clinton [1996]. (5) G

  • Q : Opportunity costs in different prices

    While a firm is NOT able of price discrimination: (w) various prices are charged for units of remotely related goods. (x) only opportunity costs are reflected in various prices for units of similar good. (y) any short term profit stimulates long run l

  • Q : Potential advantage offer by Oligopolies

    Oligopolies offer a potential advantage to society since them: (w) may be capable to amass the huge resources required for modern research and growth. (x) tend to be more socially responsible than small firms. (y) typically maximize long run quite tha