Question

Question inside!! :)

Answer 1

Alex and Edgar are police detectives in the seaside town of Marina. They’re both applying for the Captain position that recently opened. The captain’s job is mostly administrative and isn’t directly related to the capture and conviction of criminals. Alex is a very good officer. He has a high rate of apprehension and conviction of criminals on the cases he works on. Alex also does an excellent job writing up reports on the cases he deals with. Edgar, on the other hand, is not very good at solving crimes or handling paperwork. He’s been on the police force for a number of years, as Alex has, but he excels at nothing. Suppose you.re the police commissioner. Using the economic concepts of absolute and comparative advantage, state whom you will promote to the Captain’s job, Alex or Edgar. Explain your choice.

***I'm pretty sure it would be Alex that's promoted right? But how exactly would I go on to explain that? Via comparative and absolute advantage?

Thank you!! :D

Answer 2

Not sure why it's doing that! :/ but it's doing that when there's an apostrophe hahaa

Answer 3

define the advantages to start with

Answer 4

apostrpohe, minus sign , inequality ... its an encoding decoding issue that seems to get resolved with a refresh

Answer 5

okay :)

The absolute advantage is the ability of a country to produce a good using fewer resources than another country. And the comparative advantage is the ability of a country to produce a good at a lower opportunity cost than another country.

Right?

And ohh okay, let me refresh!

Answer 6

Oh yay, they're gone! Thanks for the tip! :)

Answer 7

@amistre64 what happens next? :O

Answer 8

absolute seems to be focused on efficiency

comparitive seems to focus on the end pricing as a result of maybe subpar components

Answer 9

ohh okay:) following! :D

Answer 10

Alex has an absolute advantage, but Edgar may have a comparitive advantage. inmy eyes

Answer 11

ohh, could you please explain that to me? :O

Answer 12

getting alex of the streets is bad for business, and bad for overall costs. fewer criminals are caught and it costs more to have him in the position.

edgar isnt doing any good on the streets so moving him isnt going to hamper criminal aquisitions. and he can work at the position for less money.

Answer 13

why do companies hire teenagers with no experience over well trained applicants?

Answer 14

ohh okay :)

so that just presents the facts and the effects it has with the overall costs?

and do they hire them because they will accept less money for their paycheck? since they don't have experience?

Answer 15

its a money game yes

say you have a crew making 30-7-7-7 = 51/4 per hour on average as opposed to say 30-20-15-10 = 75/4 per hour on average

Answer 16

to cover your arses you want to balance experience and hired goons so that your average costs are low and the output is relatively decent

Answer 17

ahh okay makes sense :)

and haha "arses" :P haven't heard that in a long time hahaha

Answer 18

:) it doesnt matter who you pick in this scenario, as long as you can back up your pick in a logical manner using one of the advantages mentioned

Answer 19

ahh okay so would either of these work?

edgar because people with less experience cost less to pay. he will later be trained and will prove to be adequate, but for less pay.

or

alex because he can train those with little to none experience. those will accept less pay but will be able to do the later on with the correct training and will be paid less. alex would be an investment.

are those correct? :D

Answer 20

the wordiness of it all is not my strong point. ive been out of the classes for too long. its fresher in your head so id defer to your judgement on that part

Answer 21

try to work in the definition of the specific advantage to guide you

Answer 22

1230 in the morning ... why you always call me when your _____ lol i gotta go, good luck

Answer 23

ahh okay:)

so would alex be using absolute advantage? since they use him to train the inexperienced? and edgar is comparative since he would be cheaper i suppose? hahaa

and oh! okay! :) thanks so much!! good night :D

Answer 24

thats what i see it as alex absolute, edgar comparitive

Answer 25

ciao

Answer 26

thanks!! haha ciao! :D

Answer 27

If I were in the commissioner's shoes, I'd promote Edgar. Here's why.

Alex is good at catching criminals since it states "He has a high rate of apprehension and conviction of criminals on the cases he works on". He is also good at writing up reports. If we think about the decision in terms of an opportunity cost, we have to consider what happens when Alex is the captain. More importantly, what we give up when that happens. If Alex were made to be captain, then the opportunity cost is the fact that we give up Alex being out on the street catching the bad guys. We really don't give up the report writing since he can do that in his captain's office, but there's not much to report on when he's out in the field. Anyways, this is a big thing we're giving up.

Compare this to Edgar. He's not so great at his job. If we promote him, we don't miss out on his underwhelming detective and police skills. So the opportunity cost is lower here. That's why Edgar has a comparative advantage over Alex and why he should get the job.

In all honesty, this is lousy because we're stuck between two choices: one very good candidate and one subpar candidate. Ideally we promote the best, but not if the only thing left is a lousy officer.

Answer 28

ahh okay, thank you!! and yes i agree that this is lousy haha :P