Mostly summarized from Gregory Mankiw’s Principles of Economics, 5th Ed.

PART 5 Firm Behavior and the Organization of Industry

Chapter 17 of 36 Oligopoly

Section 14 of 25

In the game theory prisoners’ dilemma police question two suspects.

Lack of cooperation between the suspects is desirable, it results in conviction of more criminals.

The prisoners' dilemma is a dilemma for the prisoners, but results in a gain for society

The prisoners' dilemma describes many of life's situations.

It shows cooperation can be difficult to maintain even when cooperation would make both players in the game better off.

This lack of cooperation is a problem for those involved in these situations.

But in some cases, the non-cooperative equilibrium is bad for both the players and society.

In the arms-race game, the United States and the Soviet Union end up at the equilibrium of armed and at mutual risk.

In the common-resources game, the cost of the extra wells dug by Texaco and Exxon are waste.

In both these cases, society is better off if the two players reach the cooperative outcome.

In the case of oligopolists trying to maintain monopoly profits lack of cooperation is desirable for overall society, price is lower and supply is greater.

The monopoly outcome is good for the oligopolists, but is bad for consumers.

The competitive outcome is best for society because it maximizes consumer + supplier total surplus.

When oligopolists do not cooperate, the quantity they produce is closer to the maximized total surplus optimal quantity.

The invisible hand guides markets to allocate resources efficiently only when markets are competitive.

Markets are competitive only when competing firms do not cooperate.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

HAT Manifesto Part 1/3 - Rubric Cube - 240804 revision