This is a test page!

Test your formatting skills here.

Table of contents
  1. The Problem of "Excessive Duplication"
  2. SubSubheader 1
  3. SubSubheader 1




Title

The Problem of "Excessive Duplication"



Inflation is a general increase in the money supply.2

SubSubheader 1


Prices do not stay constant, they are always rising and declining. An increase in the money supply - inflation, properly defined - has a tendency to raise them in general.

SubSubheader 1


In a popular definition, inflation is an ongoing rise in the general level of prices.



This
is
more
text
... and here is another, bold-formatted footnote 3

4

Jenna's Home Page

TestName

a box on the left side


a box on the right side





Productivity
product xproduct y
person a64
person b46

Economies of Scale During the Franchise Monopoly Era
During the late nineteenth century, when local governments were beginning to grant franchise monopolies, the general economic understanding was that "monopoly" was caused by government intervention, not the free market, through franchises, protectionism, and other means. Large-scale production and economies of scale were seen as a competitive virtue, not a monopolistic vice. For example, Richard T. Ely, co-founder of the American Economic Association, wrote that "large scale production is a thing which by no means necessarily signifies monopolized production."5 John Bates Clark, Ely's co-founder, wrote in 1888 that the notion that industrial combinations would "destroy competition" should "not be too hastily accepted."

6

7

test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test linetest line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line test line



  1. a
  2. b
  3. c

  1. d
  2. e


Title

Bullet item
  • Bullet item 2


    Articles

     



    CategoryWiki
     Notes 1: Henry Hazlitt. "What You Should Know About Inflation", referenced 2009-06-07.
    2: Henry Hazlitt.
    3: note #2
    4: http://example.com/jenna/ Jenna
    5: Richard T. Ely, Monopolies and Trusts (1990), page 162.
    6: A.W. Coats, "The American Political Economy Club," American Economic Review (Sept. 1961): 621-37.
    7: Another frequently used criterion for public goods is that of “non-rival-rous consumption.” Generally, both criteria seem to coincide: when free riders cannot be excluded, nonrivalrous consumption is possible; and when they can be excluded, consumption becomes rivalrous, or so it seems. However, as public goods theorists argue, this coincidence is not perfect. It is, they say, conceivable that while the exclusion of free riders might be possible, their inclusion might not be connected with any additional cost (the marginal cost of admitting free riders is zero, that is), and that the consumption of the good in question by the additionally admitted free rider will not necessarily lead to a subtraction in the consumption of the good avail able to others. ¶ Such a good would be a public good, too. And since exclusion would be practiced on the free market and the good would not become available for nonrivalrous consumption to everyone it otherwise could—even though this would require no additional costs—this, according to statist- socialist logic, would prove a market failure, i.e., a suboptimal level [p. 249] of consumption. Hence, the state would have to take over the provision of such goods. (A movie theater, for instance, might only be half-full, so it might be “costless” to admit additional viewers free of charge, and their watching the movie also might not affect the paying viewers; hence the movie would qualify as a public good. Since, however, the owner of the theater would be engaging in exclusion, instead of letting free riders enjoy a “costless” performance, movie theaters would be ripe for nationalization.) On the numerous fallacies involved in defining public goods in terms of nonrivalrous consumption cf. notes 12 and 16 below.

    There are no comments on this page. [Add comment]

    WikkaWiki