2.

If it is important, I consider things such as my profit from it, its positive and
negatives to me and the people around me, how big will the effect be, what will happen
afterwards, and what are the compensations or losses for this choice. For Regular
choices I guess I just act based from my past experiences, questioning did it do any
good to me before? And where did I felt more satisfaction, joy, and a sense of
achievement. Before I used to act based on instincts only considering only what is good
for me at that moment. But I tasted a lot of bitter things after that and felt regret. I
myself is the product of acting based on instincts. If I only focused on my studies before
I could be on my final year in college by now. That’s why I learned how to make proper
decision making after that.

3. Positive Economics for me is the study of how a system works and not considering
what should be done next. Normative economics on the other hand is the study of what
should be done to the system that has been studied by positive economics and think of
a way to correct or to make that system better. I think that we need these 2 methods in
studying economics since we need to know what the structure is and how it works.
Based on that study we can think of a way how we can act towards it to correct it or to
improve it.

4.a. Based from the sentence pattern, my theory is using the building is the opportunity
cost of renting it since there was an “instead” on the sentence which makes renting it
the more ideal perspective. But if there were more information about the business, then
we could make a conclusion depending on quality and efficiency. One Factor to consider
to identify if B is the opportunity cost of A, if A has better quality or effectiveness than
B, then B is the opportunity cost of A.

4.b. Again I will point out the use of “instead” in the sentence. So my theory is that
powdered detergent is the ideal product. Therefore I theorize that detergent bar soap is
the opportunity cost of powdered detergent. The use of instead; I used B instead of A.
Therefore I substituted the use of A with B for it is the 2nd best ideal that I could achieve
since I couldn’t achieve A.

4.c. In here I would like to diverse from my previous answers despite the use of “rather”
which is used like “instead”. In here I conclude that Public Transportation is the
Opportunity cost of Driving his Honda Civic. Humans usually decide on the best quality
goods. For example if I was asked where do I want to be treated to? Tadakuma or
McDonalds? Considering that the person who asked me will be the one paying and not
me. I would choose Tadakuma since the food there has better quality even though it is
expensive. Humans will continue to choose the best quality goods that is within their
means.

4.d. I would go back to my earlier answer with the use of “instead” since I discussed
some factors that consider on how to identify the opportunity cost. But this situations
lack factors like what school, how much, the data of the student enrolling and if he
already failed on the nursing. So I therefore give a theory that Engineering is the
opportunity cost of Nursing based from the sentence pattern.

4.e. I would like to base my conclusions in the sentence pattern again since the
situation lacks data (Example of a Fallacy of Composition Practice). I therefore give a
theory that Hershey’s chocolate is the opportunity cost of Snickers based from the
“instead” sentence pattern.
5. Based on my research and understanding from Wikipedia. I understood that this is a
process where in people in a sovereign state is unified to make a national identity.
Without a market, there is no development. Without economics in a market, the market
will die. The existence of market came first before the existence of a country. A country
was made through development of people from the past. Market was one of the key
factors that led to that development. Factors that I think is considered in building a
nation is land, people, government, and a market.

6.

7. The difference between efficiency and equity is that efficiency is the ratio of resources
produced over resources used, while equity is the fair distribution of these resources
produced to the people. Fair distribution is measured through the ratio of people who
have these resources over the total population of an area. On the other hand, the
difference between growth and stability is that growth is the development or the
increase of output in an economy, while stability is a condition in where the system is
running or growing with lesser errors. All of these factors are important. Without equity
there is no efficiency, without stability there is no growth. Efficiency equals growth, and
equity equals stability.