Economic Theories Explained - Advanced Challenge

Classical economics sees the pursuit of self-interest as creating societal order, while Marxism views profit as exploiting workers' labor Classical economics believes government intervention disrupts the natural order, while Marxism sees the free market as a battlefield Classical economics focuses on individual choice, while Marxism emphasizes social classes and historical materialism Classical economics promotes free trade, while Marxism advocates for protectionist policies

Game theory shows that countries have an incentive to keep polluting, even if they would all benefit from reducing emissions Game theory demonstrates that countries can cooperate to reduce emissions if they can credibly commit to mutual action Game theory predicts that countries will always choose to reduce emissions, as this is the dominant strategy Game theory is not applicable to the issue of climate change, as it involves complex global cooperation

Neoclassical economics argues that value comes from the additional satisfaction gained from consuming a good, rather than from the labor used to produce it Neoclassical economics rejects the idea of 'equilibrium' in markets, instead focusing on the constant fluctuations of supply and demand Neoclassical economics emphasizes the role of government intervention in correcting market failures, unlike the classical and Marxian views Neoclassical economics adopts the classical and Marxian view that value is determined by the cost of production, but adds the concept of diminishing marginal utility

Keynesian economics argues that government intervention is necessary to stimulate aggregate demand and prevent economic downturns Keynesian economics rejects the concept of diminishing marginal utility and instead focuses on the role of investment in driving economic growth Keynesian economics maintains that markets will naturally return to full employment, but that the process may be slow and painful without government intervention Keynesian economics agrees with the classical view that markets will naturally return to full employment, but argues that this process can be accelerated through fiscal and monetary policy

Supply-side economics argues that tax cuts will stimulate production and economic growth, while Keynesian economics focuses on boosting aggregate demand through government spending Supply-side economics maintains that high taxes and regulations are the primary cause of economic stagnation, while Keynesian economics sees insufficient aggregate demand as the root problem Supply-side economics believes that tax cuts will automatically pay for themselves through increased economic activity, while Keynesian economics sees tax cuts as potentially worsening budget deficits Supply-side economics rejects the Keynesian view that government intervention is necessary to stabilize the economy, instead advocating for a hands-off approach to economic policy

Using game theory, the likely outcome is that both countries will choose to reduce emissions, as this is the dominant strategy that maximizes their collective payoff Using game theory, the likely outcome is that both countries will choose to continue polluting, as this is the individually rational choice even though it leads to a worse collective outcome Game theory is not applicable to the issue of climate change, as it involves complex global cooperation that cannot be reduced to a simple game-theoretic model Using game theory, the likely outcome is that the countries will cooperate to reduce emissions, as they can credibly commit to mutual action and avoid the 'tragedy of rational self-interest'

True

False

Game theory shows that firms will always engage in price wars, as this is the dominant strategy that maximizes their individual profits Game theory demonstrates that firms can avoid price wars by colluding and setting prices cooperatively, as this would lead to the best collective outcome Game theory is not applicable to understanding price wars, as these dynamics are driven by factors beyond the rational self-interest of individual firms Game theory suggests that price wars are an inevitable consequence of the 'tragedy of rational self-interest', as firms are incentivized to undercut each other's prices