March 15, 2023

You are required to analyze cases you came across during the COVID-19 pandemic using the concepts, models, theories that you have learned from the course. You will need to connect COVID with

economics case study and need the explanation and answer to help me learn.

You are required to analyze cases you came across during the COVID-19 pandemic using the concepts, models, theories that you have learned from the course. You will need to connect COVID with at least one key topic, including key concepts, key models, key theories, that are taught in this course.
– Students identified issues with the environment or in healthcare and did identify per materials in the course or other acceptable materials a regulatory or policy approach in addressing those issues, and did identify all most relevant key concepts to the case or provide sufficient evidence to support the key view.
Depth: one topic, one model, or even one concept, but with lots of cases and data to support your view or test your hypotheses.
Width: multiple topics/models/concepts, each with sufficient examples/cases to explain the key terms.This is particularly powerful if you used concepts/models across different weeks? topics.
It does not have to be long. 3-5 pages excluding graphs, tables, appendix, and before references should be good enough.
Tips for a well-argued COVID-19 Analysis:
Direct to the point on your research questions/hypotheses or directly answer the questions
Well organized: each section has a central meaning with a topic sentence or key concepts at the beginning or bolded.
Bold your key terms
Define your terms first
Well-referenced for cases cited data sources, literature cited, theories and methods adopted, etc. Please use APA or Chicago or MLA style.
Proofread and check plagiarism.
Requirements: 3-5 pages
Income Distribution and Policy
?
One of the most interesting debates of our time concerns the distribution of income in the United States.?? Obviously this is a huge topic with lots of things to add to it.?
?
The material in?Grant 21,?not only starts your consideration of this material it also lets you take the first few steps towards engaging in debate.?? One key question not addressed, probably because nobody really knows the answer, is “what exactly is the impact of a distribution of income that continues to become more unequal over time.”?? We can guess at the solutions and answers; however it hasn’t been addressed widely in the literature.?
Please refer to the study guide to?.? It contains many optional readings and links to related topics.?
Also, the next section in Sakai is optional.? Many past students have been interested in the study of “ethics.”?? This material is organized to look into the four most frequently cited schools of ethical thought.? Again that material is optional.
Philosophical Underpinnings
Philosophical/Ethical Underpinnings: CSR
This?optional reading?is made available to you if you are interested in how some major ethical schools of thought impact Economic analysis.?? I understand the reading is not for everybody, but over the past semesters many of you have found interest in ties between Economics and the philosophy of guiding behaviors.?
For a broad overview relating many of our ideas to a capitalistic system please see Chapter 3: “Moral Issues in Business, William H. Shaw and Vincent Barry. 10th edition 2007. Chapter 3, pp. 102-127.??
You can download a Word version of this material using the link at the bottom of the page.?
This chapter should provide background for your thoughts, but the background is very important for students of business.? The chapter is, of course, written by “non business” people and at times you will see that perspective.? You may be asking what is the central theme of the chapter.? The main theme of the chapter is to introduce you, or to remind you, that there are several schools of thought regarding the idea of justice in a society.? Before reading this chapter you may be wondering what “justice” has to do with economics.? The complete answer is long and involved.? Here I will summarize.? Most economic systems lead to certain outcomes for individuals.?? We have spent time looking at market outcomes and the way markets create outcomes through the setting of prices and quantities.? Economic efficiency is one way to characterize those outcomes.?? A second way to characterize those outcomes involves reaching for more subjective criteria, which are found in the field of philosophy, and in particular, in theories pertaining to justice or “social justice.”?
?
It would be easy to leave the argument as some allocation being just? or not just.??However, that would simply trample our ability to draw our own conclusions on these matters.??? Below you will find a brief description of various vantage points, drawn from the philosophy and ethics literatures.?? There is not an attempt here to say one is more important, or better than, another.?? Each of them is equally valid in providing criteria for determining what constitutes a fair outcome.??There may be some value to you in recognizing that there are two types of ethical systems.?Consequentialist ethics emphasizes the consequences of a process, outcome, or ethical system.?? Contrasting with the consequentialist view is the family of deontological ethics which involve a process, outcome or ethical system that is based on moral principles.??
?
The views, or perspectives below are
The Egoism View
The Utilitarian View
The Libertarian View
Rawlsian/Social Contract View
Kant?s View
Egoism:
?
Is a normative ethical stance that holds moral agents ought/should do what is in their own self-interest prior to that of another. Egoism is wholly focused on the agent. The egoism philosophy holds that In pursuing self-interest, one ought always to do what one wants to do, in the long term, the fulfillment of short-term desires may prove detrimental to??and therefore would not be beneficial to the individual and not fully supported by the philosophy. Egoism is loosely used term for a broad spectrum for three different philosophical theories that all focus on self-interest. Egoism can be a descriptive or a normative position. Psychological egoism, the most famous descriptive position, claims that each person has but one ultimate aim: her own welfare. Normative forms of egoism make claims about what one ought to do, rather than describe what one does do. Ethical egoism claims that it is necessary and sufficient for an action to be morally right that it maximize one’s self-interest. Rational egoism claims that it is necessary and sufficient for an action to be rational that it maximize one’s self-interest.?
?
This is a view that is not in the formal reading assignment.?Essentially, this view argues that individuals should do what yields themselves the largest amount of pleasure, or, utility.?? Each individual is free to decide whether their choices include the well-being of others.?? There is a little bit more about?here.?? Please note that philosophers consider the ethical/egoism? viewpoint as belonging to the consequential ethics family because it is concerned with the ultimate outcome, rather than on principles guiding the outcome.
?
The Utilitarian View:
?
The Utilitarian View: There are many different veins of thought that dissect the utilitarian philosophy; John Steuart Mill and Jeremy Bentham hold the most infamous claims on Utilitarianism. Since this is not a course on Philosophy we will focus on the back bone of the theory and how it applies to economics. The Utilitarian principle holds that an act is morally right if it promotes the most utility. This tends to beg the question what is utility?? Utility is understood as aunit of happiness, we focus on happiness because the philosophical consensus is that happiness is the driving force behind human action.
?
The most common question posed to economists with regards to utility, first asked by philosopher Adam Smith: if everyone strives to maximize their personal utility, will the general benefit be maximized? In it?s early, purest forms, Economics argued that while everyone pursued their own self interest, an economy could reach the greatest general benefit for all involved if certain conditions were met.?? Key among those conditions were assumptions related to market power of sellers, externalities, public goods, and comparative advantage in trade ? to name a few.?The lessening of these restrictions have kept alive much Economic debate.?
?
A more direct attack on the relationship between social good and private decision making is provided by Bentham?()
?
Bentham famously discussed economics with regards to diminishing utility. Adding an additional fishing boat to an individual who already possesses dozens is going to provide very little utility, but an individual who doesn?t have a fishing boat may gain the benefit of being able to fish and participate in a market economy, and otherwise increase their gain more. The effect of wealth in the production of happiness is diminishing, said Bentham. Diminishing marginal utility unquestionably supported a position of wealth redistribution when taken alone; Bentham supported this idea, saying that if you took an amount from someone with much money, they?d feel the loss less than someone who received it would feel the benefit. Economists of today, would probably not agree with Bentham?s criticism for a couple of reasons.?? First, diminishing marginal utility, while present does not require that all parties have the same utilities; granted, this argument in the current example sounds self serving and greedy, however it is valid.?? Second, high wealth individuals should have the freedom to determine how they give away things that provide them with?low marginal utility. It is an empirical fact that very wealthy individuals provide more in terms of charity and good works than other income classes.?? Most importantly, most economists would object, at some level, to the violation of property rights in further reaches of Bentham?s example ? put simply, if I earn something, why shouldn?t I get to keep it.?The answer really also depends on the system and the policy choices made in a society.?While we should all agree to contribute, the level of contribution will be a key variable.
?
Bentham also notoriously rejected modern ideas of GDP and other metrics representing good measures of well-being or happiness, claiming that money was not a good metric of people?s happiness.
The Utilitarian view is more complex that the Ethical/Egoism view because it mostly centers on the concept of doing the most good for the largest number of people.??None the less it requires the consideration of tradeoffs.?One famous type of inquiry question about the Utilitarian View is a variant would I kill or torture 1 person to save more than 1 person???? In a business setting the Utilitarian View is more apparent when we consider things like cost benefit analysis,??SWOT analysis,??etc.?? There is a concise and entertaining article to read from The Economist? found at?. Please note that philosophers consider the utilitarian? viewpoint as belonging to the consequential ethics family because it is concerned with the ultimate outcome, rather than on principles guiding the outcome.
?
The Libertarian View:
?
The Libertarian View Is based on the concept that all people (as moral agents) fully own themselves and have certain moral powers to acquire property rights in external things. In a less structured sense, libertarianism is any view that approximates the strict view. In laymen?s terms libertarianism is the philosophy that fundamentally doubts authority and advocates transforming society by reform or revolution.
?
The Libertarian point of view is not set in consequentialist ethics, rather it is in the family of deontological ethics.?The difference being (in short form) that deontological ethics involve acting from a set of principles, rather than emphasizing the outcomes.?
?
Libertarians reject the utilitarianism?s pursuit of social well-being.?While not being egoists, they argue that that liberty is the lack of coercion by others.?? In terms of government, the libertarian view argues for a minimalist type of government protecting the rights granted to U.S. Citizens by the constitution.?
?
The Rawlsian/Social Contract View
?
The social contract point of view is not set in consequentialist ethics, rather it is in the family of deontological ethics.?The difference being (in short form) that deontological ethics involve acting from a set of principles, rather than emphasizing the outcomes.?
?
It seems like the bulk of the content of this chapter focuses on the work of Rawls.? His work is said to be of the “social contract” tradition and is growing in favor among academics.??The underlying idea of the social contract theory is that the members of a society will give up certain rights in order to get a defined set of benefits.?In prior semesters, students have expressed great enjoyment and satisfaction with the Rawls tradition.
?
What Rawls is asking us to do is to take a step back from existing social norms and seek a general theory of justice in economic distribution. The basis of Rawls? theory requires us to step into a hypothetical scenario where we are preparing to enter into a new society, we are discussing with the other members of our society what sorts of rules we want to govern ourselves with. We begin the thought process behind a veil of ignorance? meaning that we have no idea what our own race, social status, education level, social standing will be nor do we know what traits will be valued in this society. Rawls believes that these conditions are the best way to conceive of principles that are fair and provide liberty to all. If an individual does not know how he will end up in his own conceived society, he is likely not going to prefer any one class or race of people, but rather develop a notion of justice that treats all fairly.
?
The two main things that Rawls believes will emerge from this pre-society discussion holds that an agreement on two basic principles will follow:
?
?1) Each person will have an equal right to the most extensive total system of equal basic liberties compatible with a similar system for all
?
?2) Social and economic equalities would satisfy two conditions, first these conditions be attached to positions and offices open to all under conditions of equal opportunity and second that they are to be to the greatest benefit of the least advantaged members of society.
?
As we know this position is purely hypothetical, It is natural to ask why, if this agreement is never actually entered into, any person should take interest in these principles, moral or otherwise. The answer is that the conditions embodied in the description of the original position are ones that Rawls believes we do in fact accept. If we accept these truths as a basis for ourselves as individuals then, they should be, as a matter of justice applicable to all members of society. Rawls?s original position is the most organic un-biased way to conceive of the basic principles of justice concerning economic distribution and fairness. Rawls? holds that if we accept these principles as fair concepts of justice then we should be applying them to our businesses and social contracts with others.
?
Rawls? philosophy is accepted by many as a basis for discussions of corporate social responsibility. If you?re interested in some more practical day applications of Rawls? philosophy, the director of Global Justice at Yale, Thomas Pogge, has been successful in reworking the theory with more modern day applicability and can be found in his work titled Realizing Rawls.?
Rawls theory has also been openly rejected, most famously by Nobel Laureate? Milton Friedman in this New York Times article:?
?
Regardless of your personal opinion about Rawls theory it is a very popular and interesting launching point for thinking about different conceptions of justice with regards to economic distribution.
?
A more varied view of social contract theory is found here?.?If you choose to do a Google search on social contract theory? to learn more, I think there are a large number of sites but please be wary of the source? of the site and the level.??? We need to understand social contract theory from the perspective that is broader.?
?
Inquiry into the social contract theory began as philosophers wanted to understand why it is that individuals would voluntarily give up some liberties to establish and maintain a social system.?? We may add to our economic thinking if we ask why individuals will give up liberties to secure the provision of public goods and some protection from externalities.?I have always found the themes of this paragraph dominating, but not stated as such, in the writings of Thomas Jefferson.?In a more direct vein, there is a direct connection back to CSR and that connection argues that society permits? big corporations to operate and in exchange for that permission, society should have something returned.?? As we think about companies becoming involved with social issues we may begin to ask what those things returned are, and what form they will take.?There is a different answer for each of the dimensions of Carrol?s pyramid and for each circle in the domain approach, isn?t there?
?
Kant
?
In particular I need to mention another from the deontological family ? Kant?s categorical imperative.?Kant looks for one or more rules that can guide all actions.?Paraphrasing:?Kant requires that rules must be found to be right or wrong; to see if a rule is right or wrong you must check to see if the rule can be applied universally.?Actions in accord with Kant?s categorical imperative means (and this is not uniquely documented because it appears in many, many places) three things
Your actions are ethical if, and only if, they would be the right thing to do for anyone else in a similar environment.
Your actions are ethical if others are treated as ends in themselves and not a means to an end.
Your actions are ethical if your conduct generalizes into a universal law that would have others taking similar actions in similar environments.
You can read more about Kant, if you wish, at?
?
Summary:
?
Which school of thought is best??? That answer is up to you.???Again, there is no right? point of view. Each of the above schools of thought have something to say about the concept of economic justice. ?? All philosophical writers ultimately argue one should consider the basis for action as being fair and as being in accordance with social norms.?? Interestingly, they say relatively little about it being legal.?
If you follow the different schools of thought through to their recommendations for policy the results may surprise you.?
?
My expectations for your reading of this chapter
You?should gain an appreciation for the complexity involved in defining “justice” as it pertains to economic and social outcomes.
This appreciation should be aptly expressed using the ethical perspectives presented this week ? or another ethical perspective.?
You can download a Word version of this?.
Chapters 6 and 8 – Regulation

There is a lot of information in the world about how business should be regulated.?? The 2 chapters on the syllabus for this week give a great backdrop into that realm.?
Please see reading guide?.
Please see reading guide
Intro To Social Entrepreneurship
?
This material is really quite different than most of the other topics within this course.?? One way of understanding that difference is that Economists generally think in terms of models; this material is about describing and understanding a process.
?
What is social entrepreneurship??? That debate is long.? The first assigned chapter provides some context for that question.? Generally it is a process in which people attempt to address a social need through a market mechanism.?? Below you will find reading guides to the three assigned chapters.?? I hope you will read carefully the first chapter, skim through the second chapter, and begin paying attention again to the third chapter.?
There is one big idea behind this topic and that is the question of should firms benefit their owners, should firms benefit the society, or some combination of both.? Admittedly it became fashionable in the early 2000’s to talk about “corporate social responsibility” which was a school of thought that said firms should serve society.??? This creates many questions, like if governments already serve society why must firms??? That question will not make you friends in most circles, as you think about it you can see why.?? However there is a compelling??ago by Milton Friedman where Friedman says a lot of things among them that the interests of the owners of the firm are paramount.? If you read the Friedman piece please do so carefully.? On the one hand social entrepreneurs represent owners whose interest is serving society.? On the other hand, we wonder why governments seem to fail so often that social entrepreneurs are needed.?
Reading notes: Chapter 3 Visions of the Future
ECON 650
From Chapter 1 of Environment & Natural resource Economics, Tenth Edition. Tom Tietenberg and Lynne Lewis. Copyright 2015.

The purpose of this reading guide is not to simply create more stuff? for you to read. With all that is available freely online there are easier ways to create more things for you read for the sake of reading. Instead there are two purposes for this reading guide.
The first purpose is to try and draw attention to certain ideas in the assigned readings. Quite honestly this is done to improve your ability to target the topics contained within the assigned reading. These instructions will never tell you not to read something; instead they may work to help you understand what the major points of emphasis are as opposed to supporting points. Again, all assigned readings are required.
The second purpose is to provide additional ideas complementing, or even challenging, the material assigned readings. You will find links to other readings (either on the web, on reserve at the University library, or within the Sakai course).
Sometimes the reading guide is used to accomplish some of the things that would be in a lecture? for the course ? if there is a lecture.
This chapter is among the most chock full of content we will face this semester. Its purpose is to provide a short introduction and background to a number of concepts tied to market regulation.
The overall challenge, from my perspective, is to have you thinking about the concepts and then think to yourself what if there is no regulation for this particular problem?? We have already entered some of the discussion about regulation when we spoke of externalities ? that is actually a huge reason for regulations and some of those ideas appear this week in our readings.
This chapter brings to bear some of the ideas from the previous chapter. It unfortunately assumes some background in Micro-Economics.
When Competition Fails to Regulate
Three ideas as to how uncompetitive industries might result from economic forces are presented here.
Economies of Scale and Scope. This is a problem particularly if large fixed investments are required to enter an industry and thus be a worthwhile competition. A special case of the economy of scale argument is the notion of a natural monopoly.
Sunk Costs. Again the emphasis here is on a requirement for entry into an industry. I would be more inclined to enter an industry if I don?t lose all my fixed costs if I enter and fail.
Network Economies and Compatibility. This is a relatively new and interesting idea. Your authors use a formal network theory structure, i.e. see Figure 1 page 153. The idea though is broader. If the value of a particular product is enhanced by the more people that use it, a very uncompetitive situation could emerge. Some argue that network effects were what ultimately led to the emergence of Windows over Mac in the late 1990?s. Some more historical arguments relate to the idea that 8-track music was replaced by cassettes years ago. Now we see high tech products having some degree of compatibility.
Section 2: Competitive Markets or Government Intervention
The purpose of this section is to make us think about how we regulate by considering Theories of Regulation. The first, social choice, or public choice is discussed. While majority rule is good in theory we might consider the examples offered against that.
Public Interest Theory is a bit different. It argues that some knowledgeable party looks at the economics of a situation and considers what is best for society. The problems with putting experts? in charge is that experts frequently are supplanted by, you guessed it, greed. Thus the next two sub-sections talk about lobbying/rent seeking and capture theory.
Contestable markets. I don?t expect you to know the math, or the graphs for the idea of a contestable market, but you should know how to use the word. What makes a market contestable versus a market that is non-contestable? Clearly it is the primary purview of entry conditions.
Section 3: The Transformation of Regulated Industries
The main point of this section is that regulation and the industries regulated transform as cultures, customs, and technology changes. One interesting idea is that the problem is frequently now being viewed as one of access and property rights. The rest of the section is very theoretical and some technical information is required. Feel free to go light on this section looking for big ideas. Ramsey pricing and double marginal pricing are, well a bit on the economic theory side.
Section 4: Economic Welfare Revisited
This is an excellent summative section and I suggest you read the entire section.
Reading notes: Chapter 8: Pursuing Social Regulation
ECON 650
From Chapter 20 of Market Regulation, 1/e Roger Sherman, Prentice Hall.

The purpose of this reading guide is not to simply create more stuff? for you to read. With all that is available freely online there are easier ways to create more things for you read for the sake of reading. Instead there are two purposes for this reading guide.
The first purpose is to try and draw attention to certain ideas in the assigned readings. Quite honestly this is done to improve your ability to target the topics contained within the assigned reading. These instructions will never tell you not to read something; instead they may work to help you understand what the major points of emphasis are as opposed to supporting points. Again, all assigned readings are required.
The second purpose is to provide additional ideas complementing, or even challenging, the material assigned readings. You will find links to other readings (either on the web, on reserve at the University library, or within the Sakai course).
Sometimes the reading guide is used to accomplish some of the things that would be in a lecture? for the course ? if there is a lecture.
Section 1: Benefit-Cost Analysis
The main idea here is to begin to think about all the costs and benefits of an economic action, thus the ideas are similar to producer surplus and consumer surplus from an earlier economic time.? Figure 1 makes clear that total benefits are the area under the demand curve and total costs are the area under the supply ? as far as that goes.
The most interesting art of the section is on page 208 where the discussion refers to income distribution.? Put another way within our concept of Pareto efficiency it is theoretically possible for the winners? to compensate the losers.? However doing so is really a question of income or benefit distribution. In a detailed sense, not everybody believes the Kaldor Rule; however its logic is certainly strong.
Section 2: Valuing Nonmarket Objects
Valuing life. You need to read this section carefully. There are three general approaches, which do you think is most fair?
For things other than prices other techniques are relevant, particularly expert analysis, surveys, and hedonic indexes.
One big issue here that appears but in a muted way. Are we talking about the individual?s value of their life, or society?s value of their life? How might they differ?
Section 3: Command and Control Means of Social Regulation
You can read the steps of the command and control approach. However the basic idea is that the solution to a problem is forced through regulation. There are advantages and disadvantages to this approach.
Section 4: Tax-Subsidy And Property Rights Means of Social Regulation
This section provides some of the mechanics of the treatment of social problems we have seen before.
You should be able to trace through and define each of the areas (shown by letters) in Figure 2. This provides a great way to compare alternatives. In particular the discussion of the Coase Theorem in this context is simply wonderful.
You can also read about the practical and theoretical problems of these solutions ? and I hope you recall the discussion of the distribution of income/benefits earlier.
Section 5: Information as Regulation
This section is interesting and optional reading. However be sure to read the chapter summary in the text.

Collepals.com Plagiarism Free Papers

Are you looking for custom essay writing service or even dissertation writing services? Just request for our write my paper service, and we'll match you with the best essay writer in your subject! With an exceptional team of professional academic experts in a wide range of subjects, we can guarantee you an unrivaled quality of custom-written papers.

Get ZERO PLAGIARISM, HUMAN WRITTEN ESSAYS

Why Hire Collepals.com writers to do your paper?

Quality- We are experienced and have access to ample research materials.

We write plagiarism Free Content

Confidential- We never share or sell your personal information to third parties.

Support-Chat with us today! We are always waiting to answer all your questions.

You are required to analyze cases you came across during the COVID-19 pandemic using the concepts, models, theories that you have learned from the course. You will need to connect COVID with

Related Posts

Lab3: Defining a Security Policy Framework

Describe what the term “invisible punishment” means

Part 1: Sampling Method Evaluation