During World War II, Hitler would often order his army to hold a particular town or river "at all costs." Was this rational? If so, explain. If not, indicate which economic idea it violated
The orders were irrational, as they ignored the concept of opportunity cost. More rational orders would have included a calculation of the cost of holding a town or river-the cost in terms of other territories that could then not be held, because the troops and equipment could not be in two places at once.
You might also like to view...
A major problem with using a tradable emission allowances system to control pollution is
A) that it grants firms a license to pollute. B) the difficulty in determining the emissions target. C) that it does not eliminate pollution completely. D) it discourages firms from implementing cost-effective pollution control technology.
In order to achieve a high economic freedom rating, a country must:
a. provide secure protection of privately owned property and evenhanded enforcement of contracts. b. refrain from creating barriers that limit domestic and international trade. c. rely more fully on markets rather than governments to allocate goods and resources. d. do all of these.
The United States is a net importer of capital. This means
a. that U.S. citizens own more foreign assets than foreigners own U.S. assets. b. that citizens of other countries are buying more U.S. assets than Americans are buying abroad. c. only that U.S. citizens own foreign assets. d. only that foreign citizens own U.S. assets. e. that citizens of other countries are buying fewer U.S. assets than Americans are buying abroad.
A competitive firm currently produces and sells 500 units of output. Its total revenue is $6,000; the marginal cost of producing the 500th unit of output is $14.50; and the average total cost of producing the 500th unit of output is $9.50 . Is the firm maximizing its profit, or should it increase or decrease output in order to increase its profit?