The cable companies get away with this by claiming they do not have competition, cities award them the contract by providing coverage, even though they may not have the lowest price. So who’s to say that state regulators from unofficially granting a monopoly to a provider with incentives? The monopolies set their price high, politicians reap the rewards and were forced to take it and like it, or go without. Other monopolies that doing business in this manner are electric companies, transportation and telephone companies. Financial markets are another element in our economy which the government once again has their hands in our pockets.
1. From your understanding of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, explain how you feel it may negatively affect America’s stock exchanges. The higher than expected costs for many public companies caused some companies to abandon their public status. The costs of SOX compliance negatively affect companies, markets, investors, and economic growth. Fewer companies are willing to enter the market because of the SOX requirements that make going public too costly.
* What are the legal requirements? * Didn’t break any laws, related to him applying company funds towards personal use even though his act was solely beneficial to himself alone. What are the ethical duties? * Maintain price-competitive markets will ensure that scares resources are used to optimally satisfy consumer needs. * Pareto Optimality wasn’t obtained because maximum benefits of most wanted goods and services produced at minimum cost of least wanted resources.
* It is more difficult to maintain consistent product quality, which may lower the customer satisfaction and sabotage the brand image. * Tariff is an uncertain factor which has to be taken into consideration. US government may impose extra tariff to protect domestic
The question we all as taxpayers should be asking is whether or not we will see a good return on our investment. The Democratic proposal is a bit more negotiable since the taxpayers would at least own an equity interest in these companies. However, even that modified plan seems too expensive and way too intrusive. We should consider alternative plans that are not quite as intrusive to market mechanisms such as the Lindt plan. The Paulson plan also seems to signal a dangerous shift away from liberal market mechanisms into an age of neo-mercantilism.
• Significant debt issue is a concern as it is risky and in conflict with the company’s culture and managerial of low-risk attitude. Hence, 20% debt-to-capital restructure is recommended as it is not significant amount as opposed to other alternatives. • Other effects, including financial distress, signaling, investment and clientele considerations, are difficult to measure but predictable to balance out to a mildly optimistic set of considerations. • An alternative approach is to increase debt in order to use the proceeds to pay dividends, however it is not recommended. In conclusion, if Hill Country were to engage in the leveraged recapitalization, this report would highly recommend the 20% debt-to-capital ratio be used to repurchase shares.
“The net export effect of expansionary monetary policy will be in the same direction as the monetary policy effect”.1 Recommended Course of Action Although both fiscal policy and monetary policy prove to have beneficial effects on an economy during a contractionary period, we believe that the government should use a combination of both policies…… - The money supply may be ineffective, but in the end people want to make sure that they will have money to save up in case of emergencies. There is no change in investment spending meaning little change in aggregate demand. - Further to this, the fiscal policy may be ineffective, as the extensive “time lags” may dig us deeper, creating a depression. - To what extent?? ?
Free market economy is also characterized by free trade without any tariffs or subsidies imposed by the government. The most fundamental concept of a free economic system is personal freedom. A free economic system assumes that people will benefit from the actions they feel most compelled to take. Working from this central idea, a free economic system allows people to form cooperative relationships that benefit both sides so people are not forced to do anything they do not wish to do. A free market also ensures that people can run their business in whatever way they see fit, without being disadvantaged by outside forces.
Decisions are based on what will maximize profits, thus serving the owners of capital, and not necessarily workers or the communities where factories are located” (Social Problems, pg 427). To prevent this, in relation to the article, I think we should move towards a protectionist society. By doing so, I believe that American workers would have to settle for working for less, but in correspondence, marketable products and the base values of good would decrease proportionally, while American workers would be allowed to maintain their jobs without fear of
A country can be a capital (or labor)-abundant nations and labor (or capital)-scarce nations which consider their comparative advantage in technologies, input productivity, and wages of labor. Free trade can bring a lot of advantage to us; however, it does not apply in real world. Tariff and non-tariff are the tools that use to trade protection or prevent the economy from undergoing adjustment during economic stagnation. Although tariff and other restriction can concede the economic losses and using resource with less efficiency, but protectionism argue that non-economic benefit such as a national security can more than offset those economic losses. Normally trade protection is use to secure domestic industry and labor union’s economy welfare.