In a more recent development, satellite radio companies, such as SiriusXM, charge a regular subscription fee for streaming music without commercials. Ultimately, consumers who purchase the goods advertised are also paying for the radio service, since the cost of advertising is built into the product cost. Radio has found a way to collect revenue by selling advertising, which is an indirect way of "charging" listeners by taking up some of their time. Because of these features, it is practically impossible to charge listeners directly for listening to conventional radio broadcasts. It is nonrivalrous, since one person listening to the signal does not prevent others from listening as well. It is nonexcludable, since once the radio signal is being broadcast, it would be very difficult to stop someone from receiving it. In some cases, markets can produce public goods. However, government spending and taxes are not the only way to provide public goods. For example, if people come together through the political process and agree to pay taxes and make group decisions about the quantity of public goods, they can defeat the free rider problem by requiring, through the law, that everyone contributes. The key insight in paying for public goods is to find a way of assuring that everyone will make a contribution and to prevent free riders. The Role of Government in Paying for Public Goods When both people reason in that way, the public good never gets built, and there is no movement to the option where everyone cooperates-which is actually best for all parties. Samuel reasons the same way about Rachel. Either way, I should choose not to contribute, and instead hope that I can be a free rider who uses the public good paid for by Samuel. However, if Samuel does contribute, then I can come out ahead by not contributing. Rachel reasons in this way: If Samuel does not contribute, then I would be a fool to contribute. The difficulty with the prisoner’s dilemma arises as each person thinks through his or her strategic choices. Contributing to a Public Good as a Prisoner’s Dilemma This sets up the prisoner's dilemma illustrated in Table 1. The problem is that, while Rachel and Samuel pay for the entire cost of their contribution to the public good, they receive only half of the benefit, because the benefit of the public good is divided equally among the members of society. Because society's benefit of $6 is greater than the cost of $4, the investment is a good idea for society as a whole. ![]() When either of them contributes to a public good, such as a local fire department, their personal cost of doing so is $4 and the social benefit of that person's contribution is $6. Say that two people are thinking about contributing to a public good: Rachel and Samuel. ![]() The free rider problem can be expressed in terms of the prisoner's dilemma game, which we learned about in the module on monopolistic competition and oligopoly. When individuals make decisions about buying a public good, a free rider problem can arise, in which people have an incentive to let others pay for the public good and then to "free ride" on the purchases of others. Visit this website to read about a connection between free riders and "bad music."
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |