Homework 1 (due 10/3, 2006) Hints (1) #3. $9,600 The opportunity cost of going to school is $9,600 of goods and services. The opportunity cost of going to school this summer is the highest-valued activity that you will give up so that you can go to summer school. In going to summer school, you will forgo all the goods and services that you could have bought with the income from your summer job ($6,000) plus the expenditure on tuition ($2,000), textbooks ($200), and living expenses ($1,400). 很多人都忘了計算＄3600元，而只計算了$6000。這樣的算法是不正確的。 因為機會成本的概念是想要讓大家在以前計算成本的想法之外， 還要【額外】的考慮背後隱含（implicit）的成本。 #6. The opportunity cost of seeing a free movie is the highest-valued activity that you forgo by spending the time (say 3 hours) at the movie house. If you usually buy popcorn and a soft drink, then the cost of these are also part of the opportunity cost of seeing a free movie. The opportunity cost of seeing Lord of the Rings is the same as for a free movie plus the $4 that you could have spent on other goods and services minus the cost of the soft drink. So seeing which movie has the higher opportunity cost depends on whether the value of the soft drink is bigger than or less than $4. 上面是給大家的參考答案。但是，這一題的題目並不是非常的完整。 讓我舉一個簡單的例子，假設，今天你抽中了一張伍佰演唱會的入場券，所以決定去看 伍佰的演唱會。然而，同時間，張惠妹也辦了演唱會，你去了伍佰的演唱會之後，你就無 法去張惠妹的演唱會，而且，張惠妹的演唱會是你的次佳選擇（即，若不去伍佰的演唱會 ，在眾多當天的同時間可以進行的活動當中，你會去張惠妹的演唱會。）張惠妹的演唱會 門票是一千塊錢，然而，你心中願意付的張惠妹的票價是一千五百塊，請問去參加伍佰演 唱會的機會成本是多少？ 答案是五百塊。 這是因為，次佳的選擇（張惠妹的演唱會） ，對你而言的『價值』是五百塊。 所以，想想看，魔戒這一題的題目少給了哪些假設？？在你自己的假設之下，重新計算機 會成本。 (2.) #1. a. omit b. (i) 1991; (ii) 1998; (iii) 1995, 1996, 1999, 2000; (iv) 1992, 1994, 1997, 1998, 2001; (v) 2000; (vi) 1992 c. omit #2. a. omit. b. (i) 2000; (ii) 1993; (iii) 1994, 1995, 1997, 2000; (iv) 1992, 1993, 1996, 1998, 1999, 2001; (v)2000; (vi) 2001 c. omit ◎ 做圖題，（一）請註明座標軸的定義和單位；（二）你在圖上做的任意的曲線， 都要加以解釋如何做出來的，做這些線的目的是什麼？線上的變數是什麼定義； （三）任何的形容詞，請明確的定義？如，”上升的趨勢很明顯…” 這是多明顯？ 請舉出適當數據來說服你的讀者。 #3. omit (3) Omit. Please make sure that you really know how to use those words. 似乎有些組別無法清楚的區分總體和個體的區別，請再看一下課本的定義。 請註明資料的來源，以後作業若是沒有註明資料來源，一律當作抄襲處理。 (4) Omit. Please make sure that you really know how to use those words. (5) Omit. Please make sure that you really know how to use those words. (6) Omit. Please make sure that you really know how to use those words. Fallacy of composition: (Parkin, page 13) The fallacy of composition is the (false) statement that what is true of the parts is true of the whole or that what is true of the whole is true of the parts. 以Parkin這本書的定義而言，指的是一個論證在個別成立與否和推廣到全部群體的 這論證是否成立的問題(或是相反的情形)。而非只一個事件對個體與總體有利或無利。 當然，不同的書籍對這樣的詞彙的定義會不同。 NOTICE： （1.）如果你作業是用打的話，請用12的字，請體諒助教眼睛不好。 （2.）作業可以不用抄題，不過題號要寫清楚。 （3）作業記得在第一頁寫上組別，組員學號。盡量都用A4的紙寫。 If you have any questions about this homework, please feel free to mail me. Hui-Ching Chuang, [email protected] --

※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 140.112.5.13