This page contains questions from readers about The Economic Way of Thinking and our replies. It is not an interactive page, however. To send us your questions, please send e-mail to email@example.com . Thanks for your comments and feedback.
1. What is wrong with Figure 10.2? It says "fix later."
This problem should be fixed in the second printing of the First Edition of the text. The only thing I can see is that it has a grey background instead of a light blue background. I have no idea why that is there, and the publisher seems a bit embarrassed about it. They're also puzzled and embarrassed about the thumbprint on p.164 of some of the copies.
2. Figure 9.5 is incorrect in the text. This, too, should be fixed in the second printing. The label ATC* on the right-hand graph is incorrect. It should be on the line at the bottom of the shaded rectangle.
Click here to see the correct version of Figure 9.5
3. Zahir wrote to ask, "On page 168 of the text in the top left hand corner in blue you have 2 descriptions of unhedged. Shouldn't the second one be a description of hedging? Is this a typo?"
You're absolutely right. The second one is a typo. Thanks for drawing it to our attention! I hope it is fixed in the second printing.
4. Another typo: Karim wrote to ask, "The mathematical step
to calculate the marginal costs, in the side column on page 111 -- is it supposed to
Yes, it is.
5. Naomi wrote:
"My question is about the production and cost data on p141 of 'The Economic Way of Thinking.'
The book states that Kayla should employ 10 worker and produce 2000 cases when the price is $2.50/case. I agree with that.
When the price is $1/case the given number of cases to be produced is 1440. Why is it not 1640 cases with 7 workers?
What is the rule when marginal cost is exactly equal to marginal revenue?"
As you can see, net revenues are the same whether Kayla hires six workers or hires seven workers. In such cases, it doesn't matter (for net revenues) which she chooses. In the real world, she would probably make her decision based on other considerations.
6. Hey, it's Gretzky, not Gretsky, on page 18.
You're right! Thanks.
Back to the Economic Way of Thinking