Terms of Trade and the Gains from Trade발음듣기
대기중
Terms of Trade and the Gains from Trade
106문장
100% 한국어
번역 5명 참여
출처 : 칸아카데미
Terms of Trade and the Gains from Trade
[Instructor] Let's imagine a very simple world as we tend to do in economics that has two countries that are each capable of producing either pants or shirts, or some combination.
And so what we have here are the production possibility curves for each of those countries and this is in per worker per day.
So, for example, in country A, per worker per day they could, if they put all of their energy into pants they could produce 20.
If they put all of their energy into shirts they could produce 10.
Or there could be some combination that would sit on this line.
Now, to help us digest the production possibility curves for these two countries let me construct an output table.
So this will be this column will be the output for country A.
This column will be the output for country B.
And we're gonna think about the maximum number of pants maximum pants the maximum output of pants per worker per day.
The input is the worker per day.
And then let's think about the maximum number of shirts.
So pause this video, and see if you can fill this out.
What are the max pants and shirts in country A and country B?
Well, in country A, I already talked about it the maximum pants is 20, 20 pants.
And then the maximum shirts if they didn't make any pants, are 10.
And in country B the maximum pants are 30 and the maximum shirts, it looks like that is about 45.
Now, from either of these production possibility curves or from this output table because we have a constant opportunity cost these production possibility curves are straight lines with a fixed slope we can calculate the opportunity costs.
So let's do that next.
So this is country A and then this is country B.
And let me calculate the opportunity cost of pants and let's calculate the opportunity cost of shirts.
So pause this video, and see if you can figure that out.
What are the opportunity costs of pants and shirts in countries A and B?
And fill out this table.
Well, one way to think about it in country A, I could put all of my energy into pants and produce 20 pants or I could put all of my energy into shirts and produce 10 shirts.
10 shirts, s for shirts, p for pants.
And so if I want the cost of pants I could just divide both sides by 20 and I would get pants the amount of energy per pant is equal to well, 10 divided by 20 is 1/2 a shirt.
So the energy for pant is 1/2 for is the same as the energy for 1/2 a shirt.
And so we could say the opportunity cost of producing a pant is 1/2 a shirt.
If we want the opportunity cost for shirts we could take the reciprocal of this number.
We could say it's going to be two over one pant.
Or we could start with this equation right over here and instead of solving for p, we could solve for s.
How much energy, in terms of pants does it take for us to produce one shirt?
So if you divide both sides of this equation by 10 you would get you would get two p is equal to s.
Or another way of thinking about it the energy to create one shirt is equal to the energy to create two pants.
So the opportunity cost of producing a shirt is two pants.
With that same energy of the shirt you could produce two pants.
Now, let's also fill it out for country B.
And if you haven't done so already try to use the same method to fill this the opportunity costs for pants and shirts for country B.
Well, in country B, I could put all of my energy into pants and produce 30 pants or all of my energy into shirts and produce 45 shirts.
So the opportunity cost per pant if I divide both sides by 30 it'd be 45 over 30, which would be equal to they're both divisible by 15, 3/2 of a shirt.
The energy for one pair of pants is the same as the energy for 1 1/2 shirts I guess I could say.
So let me write it that way.
So the opportunity cost of pants is for each pair, I'm giving up 1 1/2 shirts.
And then, in the opportunity cost for shirts well, I could just solve for s here.
If I divide both sides by 45 I get the same energy for one shirt would be 30/45
of a pair of pants which is the same thing as 2/3 of a pair of pants.
And so I could write that as 2/3 of a pair of pants or, if I want, oh, let me just write it that way, 2/3 of a pair of pants.
So given the opportunity costs what should each of these countries focus on?
Pause this video, and try to figure that out.
Well, let's first compare their opportunity costs in pants.
So let's first compare their opportunity cost in pants.
It is clear that country A has a lower opportunity cost for producing a pair of pants.
It's only giving up 1/2 a shirt while country B is giving up 1 1/2 shirts.
So country A has the comparative advantage right over here so comparative advantage right over here, in pants.
And so it should focus all of its energy according to the theory of comparative advantage it should focus all of its energy on pants.
And likewise, if we look at so here we compared this to this and likewise, if we try to look at shirts right over here if we look at their opportunity cost country B is only giving up 2/3 of a pair of pants while country A would be giving up two pairs of pants.
So country B has the lower opportunity cost or the comparative advantage in shirts.
So country B should put all of their focus here on shirts.
Now, I know what you might be thinking.
People can't just walk around wearing only shirts.
People might get cold below their waist.
Or people don't want to only wear pants.
They might get cold above their waist.
And so how can people in these countries get the other type of garment?
Well, the obvious answer is, if they focus in this way they can trade.
And what would be an acceptable trading price let's say, for pants?
Let's focus on pants for a second.
So if we're thinking about the market for pants so if you're country A what would you be willing to sell pants for in terms of shirts?
Well, a good price, so to speak would be something higher than your opportunity cost.
So A willing to sell pants at price I'll put that in quotes 'cause we're really thinking of price in terms of another good at price greater than their opportunity cost greater than 1/2 of a shirt.
And you could think of this willing to trade or sell.
I'll put that in quotes.
They're really trading in our everyday language right over here.
And likewise, what about country B?
Well, B willing to buy pants they need pants, otherwise they would just be walking around with only shirts on willing to buy pants at a price at a price less than their opportunity cost for pants.
And so that would be less than 1.5 of a shirt.
So what would be a price that is greater than 1/2 a shirt and less than 1 1/2 of a shirt?
And really any price in between these two values would work.
Well, a nice round number is well, they could trade at one pair of pants for one shirt.
So a clearing price a price that would work could be one p one pants for one shirt.
And now, let's appreciate the gains from trade that they would both have here.
So let's imagine this world where country A is producing 20 pants per worker per day.
But let's say they decide that they want instead of those 20 pants they would want to trade 15 of them away for shirts.
And so they would get, at this price they would get 15 shirts.
So they're gonna give up 15 pants.
They're giving up 15 pants so they'll only have five pants right over here.
But they're going to get 15 shirts.
So they're gonna get 15 shirts.
And they're going to end right over here.
This is where country A is going to end up.
And what's cool about this is we've gone beyond the production possibilities curve.
So you see, very clearly, the gain from trade.
Country A could not have gotten to this point on its own.
This is above the production possibilities curve.
Likewise, country B was over here, with 45 shirts.
It gave up 15 of those shirts.
It now has 30 shirts.
But it now has 15 pants.
At least some of the people in the country are going to be able to wear pants now.
So it now has 15 pants.
Once again, it, too, is in a point beyond its production possibilities curve.
It would not have been able to get here without the trade.
So they are both better off.
So the key thing, the key takeaway from this video is we now appreciate why comparative advantage is valuable once again, making all the assumptions for these simplified economic models because we can calculate out opportunity cost from that comparative advantage.
And then we could think about what's a good price that they'd be willing to trade at and see that when they trade they both are able to get beyond their production possibilities curve.
번역
0%
[Instructor] Let's imagine a very simple world as we tend to do in economics that has two countries that are each capable of producing either pants or shirts, or some combination.발음듣기
대기중
And so what we have here are the production possibility curves for each of those countries and this is in per worker per day.발음듣기
대기중
So, for example, in country A, per worker per day they could, if they put all of their energy into pants they could produce 20.발음듣기
대기중
Now, to help us digest the production possibility curves for these two countries let me construct an output table.발음듣기
대기중
And we're gonna think about the maximum number of pants maximum pants the maximum output of pants per worker per day.발음듣기
대기중
And in country B the maximum pants are 30 and the maximum shirts, it looks like that is about 45.발음듣기
대기중
Now, from either of these production possibility curves or from this output table because we have a constant opportunity cost these production possibility curves are straight lines with a fixed slope we can calculate the opportunity costs.발음듣기
대기중
And let me calculate the opportunity cost of pants and let's calculate the opportunity cost of shirts.발음듣기
대기중
Well, one way to think about it in country A, I could put all of my energy into pants and produce 20 pants or I could put all of my energy into shirts and produce 10 shirts.발음듣기
대기중
And so if I want the cost of pants I could just divide both sides by 20 and I would get pants the amount of energy per pant is equal to well, 10 divided by 20 is 1/2 a shirt.발음듣기
대기중
Or we could start with this equation right over here and instead of solving for p, we could solve for s.발음듣기
대기중
So if you divide both sides of this equation by 10 you would get you would get two p is equal to s.발음듣기
대기중
Or another way of thinking about it the energy to create one shirt is equal to the energy to create two pants.발음듣기
대기중
And if you haven't done so already try to use the same method to fill this the opportunity costs for pants and shirts for country B.발음듣기
대기중
Well, in country B, I could put all of my energy into pants and produce 30 pants or all of my energy into shirts and produce 45 shirts.발음듣기
대기중
So the opportunity cost per pant if I divide both sides by 30 it'd be 45 over 30, which would be equal to they're both divisible by 15, 3/2 of a shirt.발음듣기
대기중
The energy for one pair of pants is the same as the energy for 1 1/2 shirts I guess I could say.발음듣기
대기중
And so I could write that as 2/3 of a pair of pants or, if I want, oh, let me just write it that way, 2/3 of a pair of pants.발음듣기
대기중
So country A has the comparative advantage right over here so comparative advantage right over here, in pants.발음듣기
대기중
And so it should focus all of its energy according to the theory of comparative advantage it should focus all of its energy on pants.발음듣기
대기중
And likewise, if we look at so here we compared this to this and likewise, if we try to look at shirts right over here if we look at their opportunity cost country B is only giving up 2/3 of a pair of pants while country A would be giving up two pairs of pants.발음듣기
대기중
So if we're thinking about the market for pants so if you're country A what would you be willing to sell pants for in terms of shirts?발음듣기
대기중
So A willing to sell pants at price I'll put that in quotes 'cause we're really thinking of price in terms of another good at price greater than their opportunity cost greater than 1/2 of a shirt.발음듣기
대기중
Well, B willing to buy pants they need pants, otherwise they would just be walking around with only shirts on willing to buy pants at a price at a price less than their opportunity cost for pants.발음듣기
대기중
But let's say they decide that they want instead of those 20 pants they would want to trade 15 of them away for shirts.발음듣기
대기중
So the key thing, the key takeaway from this video is we now appreciate why comparative advantage is valuable once again, making all the assumptions for these simplified economic models because we can calculate out opportunity cost from that comparative advantage.발음듣기
대기중
칸아카데미 더보기더 보기
-
15문장 100%번역 좋아요0
번역하기 -
39문장 100%번역 좋아요1
번역하기 -
Van Gogh, Self-Portrait Dedicated to Paul Gau...
30문장 100%번역 좋아요4
번역하기 -
What's going on: Light travels in straight li...
7문장 100%번역 좋아요1
번역하기
