Should all pollution be banned? Why might some level of pollution be economically efficient?
Please provide the best answer for the statement.
The economist would argue that it is necessary to weigh the marginal cost of pollution abatement against the marginal benefit to society of pollution abatement to determine the optimal level of pollution for society. In most cases, the marginal cost of pollution abatement activity that is necessary to eliminate all pollution will be much greater than the marginal benefit to society. People will not be well-served by a no pollution policy because it will be very costly in terms of resources devoted to pollution control and other productive activity that must be curtailed to eliminate the pollution.
You might also like to view...
Suppose you eat at a restaurant that serves clams at a fixed price and crab legs at a price that varies based on market conditions. Each week, the marginal utility you attach to an order of crab legs is 100, and the marginal utility of an order of clams is 50 . One week you have crab legs, but the next week you have clams. This means that
a. you are irrational b. your tastes must have changed c. the price of clams dropped below the price of crab legs d. the price of crab legs increased e. the price of crab legs must have increased to more than twice that of clams
Recovery from the 1990-91 recession occurred because wages fell and the aggregate supply curve shifted downward
a. True b. False
Which of the following will lower interest rates in the short run?
a. an increase in reserve requirements b. open market sales by the Fed c. a decrease in real GDP d. an increase in the price level
The proportion of total income received by a particular group is called the group's
A. Income share. B. Gini coefficient. C. Functional distribution of income. D. Market share.