The Following Game Does Not Have A Dominant Strategy Equilib ✓ Solved

The following game does not have a dominant strategy equilibrium

1. There are four sets of questions on this exam. You are required to answer both question set #1 (multiple choice) and #2. You also are required to answer either question 3 or question 4.

In all you are required to answer three (3) sets of questions. Question set #1 consists of a set of statements. For each statement, please a) identify the statement as either TRUE, FALSE, or INDETERMINATE, and b) provide 1-2 sentences explaining why. Question sets 2 and 4 are problems for you to solve.

In answering question sets 2 and 4, please show ALL work that you do in order to obtain partial credit for answers that may be incomplete or only partially correct. Note that sub-questions build upon one another. In answering each sub-question, you need only consider information given to that point.

2. Please make sure that you have five pages to your examination, not counting this cover.

3. Write ONLY your GMU ID NUMBER on your EXAMINATION BOOKLETS.

6. This exam is open book, open notes. You may also use a calculator and a dictionary.

7. You will have 2 hours and 30 minutes. Good luck!

Paper For Above Instructions

The manager can use the information provided to analyze the statements and problems discussed in the final exam instructions for PUBP720. Below are the evaluations of each statement in Question Set #1.

Question Set #1 Evaluations

A. Truth of Game Theory Statement

Statement: The following game does not have a dominant strategy equilibrium, but it does have a Nash equilibrium.

Evaluation: TRUE. In game theory, a dominant strategy equilibrium occurs when one player's optimal strategy remains the best choice regardless of the strategies chosen by other players. The provided payoff matrix shows that there are no dominant strategies for either player; however, there exists a Nash equilibrium where both players choose their best response, resulting in: Player 1 chooses Defect and Player 2 chooses Defect (0.5M, 0.5M).

B. Economic Profits and Competition

Statement: The existence in an industry of one firm (or a few firms) earning substantial economic profits indicates that the industry is non-competitive and Federal anti-trust action is warranted.

Evaluation: TRUE. When either one or a few firms dominate the market and earn substantial economic profits, it is often indicative of monopolistic or oligopolistic market structures. These conditions create barriers for new entrants, limiting competition, which can lead the government to consider antitrust actions to restore competitive markets.

C. Socially Optimal Solution in Non-Cooperative Games

Statement: The socially optimal solution in a non-cooperative game is known as the Nash equilibrium.

Evaluation: FALSE. The socially optimal solution focuses on maximizing social welfare, which may not align with Nash equilibria, as Nash does not guarantee optimality from a societal viewpoint when players act independently to maximize individual payoffs.

D. Monopolist vs. Perfect Competition

Statement: Economic theory predicts that, compared with a firm in a perfectly competitive market, a monopolist will produce less output and charge higher prices.

Evaluation: TRUE. Monopolists restrict output to raise prices above marginal costs in order to maximize profits, whereas, in a perfectly competitive market, firms produce at a level where price equals marginal cost.

E. Amartya Sen's Argument

Statement: In his Nobel lecture, Amartya Sen argues that the result of Arrow’s impossibility theorem can be reversed through “informational broadening”; social choice is possible as soon as one allows the possibility that human well-being in extreme states of deprivation or want can be measured objectively.

Evaluation: TRUE. Sen argues that expanding the informational basis allows more consideration of alternative social welfare frameworks, suggesting that Arrow's conditions can be met under broader circumstances.

F. Monopolist's Pricing of Unique Toy™

Statement: The monopolist selling Unique Toy™, which costs $10 each to produce, faces the following demand curve: Q = 40 – 2P. The monopolist will charge $15/toy and will sell 10 Unique Toys™.

Evaluation: FALSE. The price cannot be $15 if the monopolist is selling 10 units. Substituting Q = 10 into the demand equation gives P = $15, but the marginal cost indicates a price above that would yield a loss. Thus, this claim is economically incorrect.

G. Antibiotic Resistance and Monopoly Power

Statement: Increased antibiotic resistance occurs primarily as a consequence of monopoly power, when pharmaceutical companies with patents sell fewer antibiotics at higher prices than would be the case in a competitive market.

Evaluation: INDETERMINATE. While monopolistic practices affect pricing and access to antibiotics, antibiotic resistance is a multifaceted issue, with factors such as overprescription and misuse contributing significantly to resistance patterns.

H. Black Swan Events

Statement: A “black swan” event is characterized by three attributes: rarity, extreme impact, and retrospective (but not prospective) predictability.

Evaluation: TRUE. Nassim Nicholas Taleb describes black swan events as unforeseen occurrences that have significant effects, and they are often rationalized in hindsight, which aligns with this statement.

Question Set #2: Selfish to Fish?

Part A: Fishing Choices without Regulation

Assuming that all 10 sport fishermen in the area will maximize their payoffs, fishermen will prefer the Chesapeake Bay due to its abundant fish population compared to the Atlantic Ocean. The predicted economic equilibrium will be the outcome where fishermen select to fish in the Chesapeake Bay until diminishing returns begin to affect them.

Part B: Willingness to Pay for a Fishing License

Should a fishing license be required, the maximum a fisherman is willing to pay would equal the increased benefit of fishing which will depend on fish availability balanced against the cost they incur.

Part C: Effect of Reduced Fishermen on Fishing Choices

With the departure of 6 fishermen, the remaining 4 will likely reassess their fishing options based on reduced competition and the amount of catch available between both locations.

Part D: Impact of Licensing Proposal

Should the state implement a mandatory fishing license costing $10, the total surplus generated would need to consider both the fees collected and the cost of issuance against the benefits derived from the fish caught.

Part E: Maximum Willingness of the Tour Operator

The tour operator’s willingness to pay hinges on expected per-trip profit margins versus operational costs for facilitating these fishing excursions to maximize clientele engagement.

References

  • Arrow, K. J. (1951). “Social Choice and Individual Values.”
  • Sen, A. (1999). “Development as Freedom.” Oxford University Press.
  • Taleb, N. N. (2007). “The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable.” Random House.
  • Brandenburger, A., & Nalebuff, B. J. (1996). “Co-opetition.” Harvard Business Review Press.
  • Stigler, G. J. (1983). “The Theory of Price.” Macmillan.
  • Posner, R. A. (2001). “Antitrust Law.” University of Chicago Press.
  • Krugman, P., & Wells, R. (2015). “Microeconomics.” Worth Publishers.
  • Marshall, A. (1920). “Principles of Economics.” Macmillan.
  • Pejovich, S. (1998). “The Economics of Ownership: Is There a Link Between Private Property and Economic Growth?” Cato Journal.
  • Friedman, M. (2002). “Capitalism and Freedom.” University of Chicago Press.

Related Assignments