Consider trade relations between the United States and Mexico. Assume that the leaders of the two countries believe the payoffs to alternative trade policies are shown in the following payoff matrix:

The dominant strategy for the United States is always to choose   tariffs. The dominant strategy for Mexico is always to choose   tariffs.

True or False: The Nash equilibrium outcome for trade policy is for the United States to have low tariffs and Mexico to have high tariffs.

True

False

In 1993, the U.S. Congress ratified the North American Free Trade Agreement, in which the United States and Mexico agreed to reduce trade barriers simultaneously.

True or False: Given the trade strategy decisions in the table, the United States is better off and Mexico is worse off with this new trade policy.

True

False

Based on your understanding of the gains from trade (discussed in Chapters 3 and 9), which of the following statements accurately characterize how well the payoffs indicated for the four possible outcomes actually reflect a nation's welfare? Check all that apply.

The payoffs in the upper left and lower right corners of the matrix reflect a nation's welfare because they show that trade is beneficial and tariffs are a barrier to trade.

The payoffs in the upper right and lower left corners of the matrix do not reflect a nation's welfare because tariffs hurt overall total surplus, so both countries' welfare should decline regardless of who charges the high and low tariffs.

The payoffs in the upper right and lower left corners of the matrix reflect a nation's welfare because the nation with lower tariffs is better off, since that nation is more open to trade.

I need 7-8 sentences responding to each paragraph written by my peers. Please make sure each paragraph is error/grammar free. Please separate each paragraph written by number 1 and 2. .please write with differing viewson their response. Thanks, Chegg

1- 97% of America or 97% of Americans. Obviously, one is based on land area and the other is based on the number of people. If a cell phone company can achieve 97% of Americans, then the company's income must be very substantial. If a cell phone company achieves 97% of the US land, it shows that the coverage is very wide, for example, some areas with sparsely populated areas are also covered. According to data, the United States has a population of 328.2 million and a land area of ​​3,797,000 mi². Wyoming has the smallest population in the United States, with only more than 500,000 residents. If I choose, I will choose company A. For me, cell phone company can cover 97% of the area of ​​the United States. Relatively speaking, the manpower and material resources spent by the company will be reduced, because the area is determined and easy to operate, but 97% of Americans need to spend a lot of money. Advertising costs, etc., that is very inefficient and difficult to maintain. For example, a person who loves to travel will also choose a US cell phone company that can cover 97% America, because going to places with few people can ensure that they can call others. So I choose company A.

-------------------------------------

2-Do you think it is better for a cell phone company to cover 97% of America or 97% of Americans? What is the difference? If cell phone company A covers 97% of America, while cell phone company B covers 97% of Americans, which company would you choose and why?

In my opinion, I think this question is to rely on a company’s two basics which are profit and service. If company B covers 97% of American users, this means that they will definitely make a large amount of money. There are about 330 million people in the USA (U.S. and World Population Clock, 2020). If 97% percent of these people using the same cell phone company that means this company will make trillions of incomes. what the greatest advantage is that this company's service can choose to focus on places with a high population density. This action will help them to cut a large amount of budget. Alaska, which is the largest US state and third least populated state. The land area of Alaska is one-fifth of the U.S. but the population is third-least in the US (Kästle, 2020). If company B services this place, it will be a very uneconomical action. the company can choose to abandon these very-low-density places and try their best to serve other states with more economic benefits. If company A covers 97% of America, this means that they will have the greatest service in the United States because this means that people in the US can use this service no matter where they go. Company A needs to focus on the coverage of US territory.

At a Midwestern business school, historical data indicates that 70% of admitted MBA students ultimately join the business school’s MBA program. In a certain year, the MBA program at the University admitted 200 students.

a. Find the probability that at least 150 students ultimately join the MBA program.

b. Find the probability that no less than 135 and no more than 160 students finally join the MBA program.

c. How many students should the MBA program expect to join the program?

d. What is the standard deviation of the number of students who will join the MBA program? e. Let X be the number of students out of 200 who will join the program. Would the empirical rule apply to the probability distribution of X in this case?

Is the United States an economically just society, why or why not?

Define “eugenics” and describe the history of eugenics in the United States.

what are structure and functions of monetary institutions in the United States?

Are “free trade” agreements in the best interests of the United States?