Sentences Generator
And
Your saved sentences

No sentences have been saved yet

"monopsony" Definitions
  1. an oligopsony limited to one buyer

159 Sentences With "monopsony"

How to use monopsony in a sentence? Find typical usage patterns (collocations)/phrases/context for "monopsony" and check conjugation/comparative form for "monopsony". Mastering all the usages of "monopsony" from sentence examples published by news publications.

Furman argues that "both market concentration and frictions that reduce worker mobility can lead to greater monopsony power for employers" (monopsony is a buyer's monopoly).
I love Amazon, but is its monopsony good for authors?
Amazon's book monopsony is valuable, but it also comes at significant reputational cost; it's not at all clear that building a similar monopsony in some other market would be a net positive for the company.
But by combining standard economic models with recent evidence about the prevalence of monopsony power and other crucial economic parameters, we can get a back-of-the-envelope sense of the drag of the monopsony tax.
Up to now, though, the anti-monopsony crusade has been all-American.
During the Obama administration, the government awoke to the problem of monopsony.
You just don't want them controlling everything under them, that's a monopsony.
Oligopolistic behaviour is more visible and important in the contemporary economy than monopsony.
But in recent decades, several compelling studies have revealed that monopsony is omnipresent.
The phrase "labor market monopsony" appears not once in tens of thousands of pages.
A growing number of economists therefore argue that antitrust policy must take monopsony more seriously.
While the role of monopsony is doubtful, the rise of corporate profitability is crystal clear.
Monopsony, a term coined in the 1930s, refers to markets where a single buyer is dominant.
One explanation with a growing number of adherents is monopsony, or the power firms exert over wages.
But in a "monopsony", such as a mining town with only one mine, workers have fewer options.
The Monopsony game would hinge on all-powerful employers determining how much they will pay their workers.
Nonetheless, Posner and his fellow researchers may still be exaggerating the U.S. market evils caused by monopsony.
Monopsony can be another factor in both limiting the number of jobs and depressing wages of jobs.
It's increasingly clear, for example, that monopsony power is depressing wages; but that's not all it does.
Unions do somewhat limit workers' options, but they also offer an important counterweight against corporate monopsony power.
One explanation is monopsony power, or the power of a few consolidated employers to hold down pay.
How big of a problem do you think monopoly and monopsony are in the American economy today?
In a monopsony, a large buyer controls a large proportion of the market and drives prices down.
As Vox notes, Amazon's continued growth also threatens to give it monopsony power over other industries like shipping.
In fact, that's not the case: Employer market power, sometimes called "monopsony," harms economic growth and raises prices.
Because not all workers are willing to work at these depressed wages, monopsony leads some workers to quit.
A number of recent studies have concluded that monopsony is a very common condition in the American economy.
Publishing, too, is much less profitable now than it was 20 years ago, thanks to Amazon's formidable monopsony power.
Concentration can translate to something called "monopsony" power, where a large buyer controls a big portion of the market.
It can help spread wealth by making goods cheaper and reducing the monopsony power that firms can have over workers.
Labor market monopsony is the idea that when there isn't enough competition among businesses, it is bad news for workers.
Walmart is sometimes accused of being a monopsony—that is, being the monopoly buyer of certain products in some markets.
Monopsony power is frequently created through noncompete clauses and no-poaching agreements and is aimed at the most vulnerable workers.
In many cases, this monopsony pricing power has literally created new markets: $5 DVDs are largely the creation of Walmart.
It spreads wealth today by lowering consumer prices and giving workers more choice of jobs, reducing firms' monopsony power over them.
Like a growing number of economists, Brusuelas blames monopsony wage-setting power enjoyed by large companies that dominate metropolitan population areas.
But it also applies to situations of monopsony power, in which market concentration offers undue leverage over workers or upstream suppliers.
Nonetheless, companies that can reach a scale sufficient to exert monopsony power are among the strongest allies available to American consumers.
The University of Chicago law professor argues that increasing monopsony in different segments of the labour market is damaging the U.S. economy.
Monopsony is defined by the Roosevelt Institute as buyer power among employers, such as when there is only employer in a region.
"It's becoming fairly clear the U.S. economy has a monopsony problem," Joe Brusuelas, chief economist at RSM, an auditing firm, tells Axios.
Exerting monopsony power on behalf of consumers provides a competitive advantage that very often leads to greater market share and higher profits.
Even if the firms can mimic noncompetes with financial incentives and other perks, this cuts against the claim that monopsony power restricts wages.
Alan Krueger, a Princeton economist, argued that monopsony power is most likely part of the apparent puzzle of why wage growth is low.
How much of the decline in labor's share, or the fall in employment, is attributable to the rise of monopsony or labor market power?
As you move from left to right, labor market power increases to 2000, where pure monopsony prevails and workers have only one reasonable option.
Such firms have enough muscle in the marketplace to sell above their marginal cost; they can also pay below-market wages (so-called "monopsony" power).
First, antitrust worries, which take in big tech firms' high market shares, buying-up of promising competitors, and potential monopsony power over suppliers and vendors.
Mainstream economists are discussing questions like whether "monopsony" — the outsize power of a few consolidated employers — is part of the problem of low wage growth.
But if its private-label business grows as analysts expect it to do, could it face a legal challenge of whether it is a "monopsony"?
Overall, though, monopsony exercises a downward pressure on wages that exacerbates income inequality, argues Kate Bahn of the Washington Centre for Equitable Growth, a think-tank.
Sometimes one or a few big employers dominate local labour markets, and can thus impose below-market wages on vulnerable workers, a condition economists call "monopsony".
Amazon, meanwhile, can continue to squeeze the suppliers and retailers reliant on its platform with little worry about being charged with the abuse of monopsony power.
The government also alleged that the merger would give the new, combined company too much power to set the rates of health care providers, essentially a monopsony case.
Kavanaugh, however, noted that the deal could be stopped based on monopsony arguments that the new company would have too much heft in negotiating with doctors and hospitals.
Indeed, Medicare-for-all proponents argue that by making the federal government a monopsony purchaser of health care services you could push down prices and save money overall.
A common concern in the Populist era, for example, was that railroads could achieve monopsony pricing power over farmers in a given geographical area and squeeze their incomes.
For a long time, economists believed that labor-market monopsony rarely existed, at least outside old-fashioned company towns where a single factory employs most of the residents.
Unions used to offset employer monopsony power, but unions now represent only 7 percent of private sector workers, down from a peak of 35 percent in the 1950s.
Senator Amy Klobuchar, Democrat of Minnesota, has introduced legislation that would explicitly require antitrust regulators to weigh whether a proposed deal would increase monopsony power and hurt workers.
Under monopsony, firms typically have a number of vacancies, since to fill them they'd need to raise wages not just for new workers but for existing workers too.
"In general, monopsony power on the part of employers makes jobs scarce, whether employers' power derives from concentration or some other source," explained Marshall Steinbaum, a Roosevelt Institute fellow.
Besides the monopsony research, the Obama White House has focused on evidence that inequality is fueled by a shift away from labor unions and by corporate consolidation within industries.
A recent interpretation of their effect is more neutral: unions may be a countervailing force to monopsony, or the market power that firms have over wages and competition for workers.
To make matters worse, because the "monopsony tax" drives workers out of the labor force, it simultaneously reduces tax revenue and increases social welfare payouts to the unemployed and destitute.
One is that employers in India are so few in number that they have more power to set wages than is typically the case, a phenomenon known as monopsony power.
If wages are remaining stuck because of monopsony rather than competitive markets, that bolsters the argument for regulating anti-competitive behaviour, easing labour organising and bumping up minimum wages a bit.
That bill is an overdue correction—it's crazy that social media ads are not regulated like other ads—but does nothing about the underlying concerns about economic monopsony and media dominance.
An 800-pound gorilla with a hand grenade Some critics argue that the power of Amazon's marketplace constitutes "monopsony," meaning Amazon controls how producers can reach an essential audience of consumers.
We've known since at least the 1990s that in situations of monopsony, increasing the minimum wage can boost wages without reducing employment, a result that Econ 101 would say is impossible.
The increasingly concentrated power that employers use to shape the broader labor market to their own advantage—known as labor market monopsony — is one major problem that regulators have failed to address.
"With fewer firms competing for a given type of worker," Furman contends, each firm is more likely to exercise local monopsony, and their smaller numbers may also facilitate tacit or explicit collusion.
Back then, his work centered mainly on the monopsony power Wal-Mart exerted over its suppliers, and the broader problem of corporate behemoths creating single points of failure in global supply chains.
As with monopolies, this exercise of monopsony power boosts profits but saddles society with a deadweight loss—the underemployment of workers—as well as other costs, such as higher spending on state benefits.
And add in the growing evidence that many employers have substantial monopsony power – that is, they aren't facing a competitive labor market, but instead have quite a lot of ability to set wages.
In this case, the government would function as a monopsony, with all the downsides spelled out in the Justice Department's case against mergers between private companies: reduced competition, higher costs, more difficult access to care.
The talk of monopsony is part of a shift in the policy tools that many left-of-center economic thinkers see as most promising for addressing the economic challenges of poor and middle-class Americans.
The blue solid line in Figure 219 shows the extent of that wage suppression:* In our working paper, we take a first cut at estimating the effects of monopsony on both employment rates and wages.
A firm that has monopsony power over labor is in the same situation with regard to hiring: it would normally be happy to get more workers if it could do so without paying higher wages.
This sort of egregious and anticompetitive behavior takes place because of today's unprecedented vertical integration and monopsony power in agricultural markets – in other words, a large percentage of family farmers only have one buyer for their products.
Their consolidated buying power — also called monopsony power — has lowered margins on generic drugs such that many manufacturers have consolidated to match their bargaining power or offshored their production lines to eke out whatever margin they can.
"If employers collude to hold wages to a fixed, below-market rate, or if monopsony power increases over time, then wages could remain stubbornly resistant to upward pressure from increased labor demand in a booming economy," Krueger said.
Employers may be less sensitive to minimum-wage increases because of long-term declines in national business competition and labor bargaining power, and the rise in profit rates and monopsony (in which a single buyer dominates a market).
For example, the related discoveries that moderate increases in the minimum wage don't seem to reduce employment and that employers often have a lot of monopsony power in labor markets suggest some new dimensions to the progressive agenda.
But while political rhetoric can cause companies to proceed with caution on pricing and acquisitions, it won't cause a regulatory agency to move forward with a monopoly or monopsony case, said Keith Hylton, professor of law at Boston University.
We also know that if a single buyer is as dominant as Medicare, it functions like a monopsony, where price "negotiation" ultimately leads to supply shortages and fewer new products, as economist Paul Krugman and others have noted in other industries.
Section 7 of the Clayton Act could be rewritten to shift the burden of proof away from plaintiffs and require the merging parties to show that the proposed acquisition would not lessen competition, produce a monopoly (or monopsony), or reinforce market power.
Either way, I'd argue that the combination of downward nominal wage rigidity and monopsony power helps explain both why wages didn't fall during the period of high unemployment and why employers aren't doing much to raise wages despite tight labor markets now. 4.
Firms seem to pass on some of the costs to consumers, and in some cases have "monopsony" power: if employees have only a handful of potential employers to choose from, those employers can get away with paying workers less, because they have fewer exit options.
To remedy this potential use of buyer-side (monopsony) power, FERC added a tool to its kit: the Minimum Offer Price Rule (MOPR), which forces resources owned by the holding companies in question to meet at least a certain minimum bid price in capacity markets.
This is a message area that Democrats have been tinkering with for a couple of years now, and Booker's focus on monopsony and labor markets connects it directly to widespread anxiety about why even a falling unemployment rate isn't leading to meaningfully higher pay for most workers.
The upside of replacing private insurance with a single-payer system, as both Bernie Sanders's and the House Progressives' plans do, is that the system becomes a lot simpler and a lot cheaper, as the government can use its monopsony buying power to force down prices.
Virtually every industry has been concentrating since the late 1990s, which has given companies monopsony power and left workers with fewer employment options..As the pool of companies dwindles, workers have little choice but to settle for the terms and conditions offered by  the biggest employers.
Over the past 35 years, we have seen a substantial increase in inequality for a variety of reasons, which include a slowdown in increased educational attainment, the erosion of labor unions, the erosion of the minimum wage, and increasing monopsony power by employers — that is, the market power to set wages.
My starting point is that there's now a lot of evidence that many employers have considerable monopsony power in the labor market: that is, they don't face a going market wage they have to meet or be unable to hire at all, they face what amounts to an upward-sloping supply curve.
Antitrust regulators have consistently recognized the importance of the monopsony issue when it comes to cartels between separate companies — suing a number of big Silicon Valley companies that had reached an illegal "no poaching" agreement to depress engineers' wages — but has not in recent years appeared to recognize such concerns when conducting merger review.
Sklaroff is a political activist and has been a Republican committee person for more than two decades; he has litigated against implementation of the Master Settlement Agreement with the tobacco industry due to flawed oversight, against the creation of health-insurer Highmark because it created a monopoly and monopsony, and against unconstitutional levels of public funding for two sports stadiums in Philadelphia.
What I want to do now is, first, describe the wage puzzle; then describe the resulting debate, which is largely over how much if any slack remains in the labor market; then lay out a story which combines the issue of downward nominal wage rigidity – which has been discussed fairly extensively – with the role of monopsony power in labor markets, which I don't think has been integrated into this debate, but should be. 1.
The real thin theory: monopsony in modern labour markets. Labour Economics, 10(2), pp. 105–131. and, perhaps most importantly, in Monopsony in Motion,Manning, A. (2003). Monopsony in Motion: Imperfect Competition in Labor Markets.
If different workers have different preferences, employers could have local monopsony power over workers that strongly prefer working for them. Empirical evidence of monopsony power has been relatively limited. In line with the considerations discussed above, but perhaps counter to common intuition, there is no observable monopsony power in low-skilled labour markets in the US. Though there has been at least one study finding monopsony power in Indonesia due to barriers to entry in developing countries. Several studies expanding their view for monopsony power have found economic and labor mobility in the US precludes any detectable monopsony effects with the notable exceptions of professional sports and (with some disagreement) nursing.
A review of Alan Manning's 'Monopsony in Motion'. International Journal of the Economics of Business, 11(3), pp. 369–378.Rizzo, M. (2004). Review of 'Monopsony in Motion: Imperfect Competition in Labor Markets'.
Both of these industries have highly specialized labor conditions and are generally not substitutable. According to a 2020 review of the existing literature on monopsony in labor markets, there is some evidence of monopsony power in higher income industries due to contractual limitations (non-competes for example) though the author notes that the large majority of economists do not ascribe notable monopsony effects to labor markets.
A monopsony is a market where there is only one buyer and many sellers.
The grey rectangle is a measure of the amount of economic welfare transferred from the workers to their employer(s) by monopsony power. The yellow triangle shows the overall deadweight loss inflicted on both groups by the monopsonistic restriction of employment. It is thus a measure of the market failure caused by monopsony. The lower employment and wages caused by monopsony power have two distinct effects on the economic welfare of the people involved.
Competition among hiring firms had given way to what would today be called oligopsony or monopsony.
Disregarding the SSEB, and the possibly emerging independent generating stations, the monopsony will be succeeded by duopsony.
There may have been instances of monopsony or oligopsony in the 19th century, but they were short-lived.
A bilateral monopoly is a market consisting of both a monopoly (a single seller) and a monopsony (a single buyer).
Using modern terms, in labor markets oligopsony or monopsony emerges, and market imperfections and a zero reservation price for labor exist.
Joan Robinson in the 1920s In 1933, her book The Economics of Imperfect Competition, Robinson coined the term "monopsony," which is used to describe the buyer converse of a seller monopoly. Monopsony is commonly applied to buyers of labour, where the employer has wage setting power that allows it to exercise Pigouvian exploitation and pay workers less than their marginal productivity. Robinson used monopsony to describe the wage gap between women and men workers of equal productivity. In 1942, Robinson's An Essay on Marxian Economics famously concentrated on Karl Marx as an economist, helping to revive the debate on this aspect of his legacy. In 1956, Robinson published her magnum opus, The Accumulation of Capital, which extended Keynesianism into the long run.
A group of hacendados (owners of haciendas), who did not feel adequately represented at the Cabildo, asked Moreno to defend them. Moreno wrote The Representation of the Landowners, a report that represented the export interest of the landowners, encouraged free trade and condemned the privileges of the merchants benefited from the monopsony. It is considered the most comprehensive economic report from the time of the viceroyalty. It represented the new European economic ideas and noted that the legal monopsony with Spain did not prevent British goods from being smuggled.
However, monopsony power might also be due to circumstances affecting entry of workers on the supply side (like in the referenced case above), directly reducing the elasticity of labour supply to firms. Paramount among these are industry accreditation or licensing fees, regulatory constraints, training or education requirements, and the institutional factors that limit labour mobility between firms, including job protection legislation. An alternative that has been suggested as a source of monopsony power is worker preferences over job characteristics. Such job characteristics can include distance from work, type of work, location, the social environment at work, etc.
Monopsony theory was developed by economist Joan Robinson in her book The Economics of Imperfect Competition (1933). Economists use the term "monopsony power" in a manner similar to "monopoly power" as a shorthand reference for a scenario in which there is one dominant power in the buying relationship, so that power is able to set prices to maximize profits not subject to competitive constraints. Monopsony power exists when one buyer faces little competition from other buyers for that labour or good, so they are able to set wages and prices for the labour or goods they are buying at a level lower than would be the case in a competitive market. A classic theoretical example is a mining town, where the company that owns the mine is able to set wages low since they face no competition from other employers in hiring workers, because they are the only employer in the town, and geographic isolation or obstacles prevent workers from seeking employment in other locations.
Only activities associated with a dynamic exporting centre enjoyed some degree of prosperity, as occurred in Tucuman, where cloth was manufactured, and in Córdoba and the Litoral, where livestock was raised to supply the mines of Upper Peru. This trade was legally limited to Spain: the Spanish Crown enforced a monopsony which limited supplies and enabled Spanish merchants to mark up prices and increase profits. British and Portuguese merchants broke this monopsony by resorting to contraband trade. The British desire to trade with South America grew during the Industrial Revolution and the loss of their 13 colonies in North America during the American Revolution.
The market failure can only be addressed in one of two ways: either by breaking up the monopsony through anti-trust intervention, or by regulating the wage policy of firms. The most common kind of regulation is a binding minimum wage higher than the monopsonistic wage.
Alternative theories include that prices reflect relative pricing power of producers and consumers. A monopoly may set prices so as to maximize monopoly profit, while a cartel may engage in price fixing. Conversely, on the consumer side, a monopsony may negotiate or demand prices that do not reflect the cost of production.
Alan Manning's research concentrates on labour economics, with a focus on unemployment, minimum wages, monopsony, immigration and gender pay gaps in the UK and Europe.Profile of Alan Manning on the website of LSE. Retrieved April 6th, 2019. According to IDEAS/RePEc, Manning belongs to the top 1% of economists in terms of research output.
A de facto monopoly is a system where many suppliers of a product are allowed, but the market is so completely dominated by one that the others might as well not exist. The related terms oligopoly and monopsony are similar in meaning and this is the type of situation that antitrust laws are intended to eliminate.
In monopsony theory, which describes situations where there is only one buyer (in this case, a "buyer" for labor), wage discrimination can be explained by variations in labor mobility constraints between workers. Ransom and Oaxaca (2005) show that women appear to be less pay sensitive than men, and therefore employers take advantage of this and discriminate in their pay for women workers.
As a result, many countries have antitrust or other legislation intended to limit the ability of firms to accrue market power. Such legislation often regulates mergers and sometimes introduces a judicial power to compel divestiture. A firm usually has market power by virtue of controlling a large portion of the market. In extreme cases—monopoly and monopsony—the firm controls the entire market.
Viterra Inc. was formed in 2007 as a publicly traded corporation when the Saskatchewan Wheat Pool acquired Agricore United, which was at that time the largest grain handler in Western Canada. Viterra's predecessors were the grain-trading co- operatives set up in Canada during the 1920s known as the wheat pools. It has since acquired the former Australian government-sponsored monopsony marketing board, the Australian Barley Board, created in 1939.
The NFO engaged in producers strikes called “holding actions” to get food processors who ordinarily held monopsony power over farmers to sign the agency contracts. On March 16, 1967, the NFO started their most notable holding action. They withheld milk from the market for 15 days, reducing national supplies by two percent. This ended due to a temporary restraining order issued by US Federal Judge Stephenson of the US District Court for Southern Iowa.
The simpler explanation of monopsony power in labour markets is barriers to entry on the demand side. Such barriers to entry would result in a limited number of companies competing for labour (oligopsony). If the hypothesis was generally true, one would expect to find that wages decreased as firm size increased or, more accurately, as industry concentration increased. However, numerous statistical studies document significant positive correlations between firm or establishment size and wages.
He held a monopsony (monopoly of purchase) on tin in Devon and Cornwall until 1316, when it was taken away following complaints. He was appointed seneschal of Gascony on 17 November 1317, but after a year he was removed from office following complaints against him by the Gascons in November 1318. By April 1320 his fall from grace was complete and he left England. He had not got on well with the Despensers, Edward II's new favourites.
Thus the rate of exploitation is zero under competitive conditions, when this elasticity tends to infinity. Empirical estimates of e by various means are a common feature of the applied literature devoted to the measurement of observed monopsony power. Finally, it is important to notice that, while the gray-area redistribution effect could be reversed by fiscal policy (i.e., taxing employers and transferring the tax revenue to the workers), this is not so for the yellow- area deadweight loss.
The league became embroiled in numerous internal conflicts, not the least of which was a plan supported by some owners (and bitterly opposed by others) to form a "trust", wherein there would be one common ownership of all twelve teams. The NL used its monopsony power to force a $2,400 limit on annual player wages in 1894. As the 20th century dawned, the NL was in trouble. Conduct among players was poor, and fistfights were a common sight at games.
Monopoly power is an example of market failure which occurs when one or more of the participants has the ability to influence the price or other outcomes in some general or specialized market. The most commonly discussed form of market power is that of a monopoly, but other forms such as monopsony, and more moderate versions of these two extremes, exist. A well-known example of monopolistic market power is Microsoft's market share in PC operating systems. The United States v.
23 Liniers was succeeded by Baltasar Hidalgo de Cisneros a few months later, who pardoned the mutineers to reduce political conflicts. Cisneros allowed free trade as well, as instructed by the Junta of Seville, which benefited British merchants; Britain was allied with Spain in the Peninsular War. The agents of the Consulate of Cadiz asserted that this would hurt the local economy, moral values, social usages, religious practices, and the loyalty to Spain and its monarchy. As a result, Cisneros closed trade again, restoring the Spanish monopsony.
However, if the labor market is in a state of monopsony (with only one employer available who is hiring), minimum wages can increase the efficiency of the market. There is debate about the full effects of minimum wages. The movement for minimum wages was first motivated as a way to stop the exploitation of workers in sweatshops, by employers who were thought to have unfair bargaining power over them. Over time, minimum wages came to be seen as a way to help lower-income families.
A supplier may bid in a very competitive environment with a customer to build a widget. However, to make the widget, the supplier will be required to build specialized machinery which cannot be easily redeployed to make other products. Once the contract is awarded to the supplier, the relationship between customer and supplier changes from a competitive environment to a monopoly/monopsony relationship, known as a bilateral monopoly. This means that the customer has greater leverage over the supplier such as when price cuts occur.
In the 1990s, the export arrangement was reorganised in response to pressure from increasing fruit supplies from competing overseas export markets. To regain profitability and stability, the New Zealand Government and growers colluded to establish a single-desk export arrangement. This granted a monopoly on the marketing of kiwifruit to Zespri and mandated that all suppliers sell their products through this single buyer (see also monopsony) for all exports outside of Australasia. All New Zealand kiwifruits are marketed under the brand-name label Zespri.
Their governments created the Australian Wheat Board and the Canadian Wheat Board as monopsony marketing boards, buying all the wheat in those countries for export. Together, those two boards controlled a large percentage of the world's grain trade in the mid-20th century. Additionally, farmers' cooperatives such the wheat pools became a popular alternative to the major grain companies. At the same time in the Soviet Union and soon after in China, disastrous collectivization programs effectively turned the world's largest farming nations into net importers of grain.
Marie Thursby has used an extended version of the model to examine international trade in wheat, 60% of which is produced by the United States and Canada. Thursby includes marketing boards, possibility of a monopsony, and a variety of government policies in the analysis. She finds that while there are significant economies of scale in the industry, the barriers to entry are not high and regardless of the extent of market power that US firms have in the industry, the optimal policy is actually an export tax, rather than a subsidy.Baldwin, pp. 98–101.
The Australian Wheat Board and AWB Limited enjoyed a monopoly over the sale of Australian wheat exports. It achieved this through the use of a monopsony (single buyer) regime within Australia, where wheat growers were only able to sell on their wheat to a single desk. This was intended to prevent farmers under-cutting each other on price, and thus assure the highest price for Australian wheat. The AWB had sold wheat to Iraq since 1948, and was the single largest supplier of humanitarian goods to the nation during the Oil-for-Food Program.
At trial, CBOT asserted that the rule did not have any unlawful purpose, but rather was set up to curb certain pre-existing problems and abuses. CBOT claimed that a group of agents were lowering discounts on commissions to those people buying grain after hours. These agents would wait until after hours, and then buyers would get cheaper prices. CBOT wanted to curb the power of these monopsony/oligopsony type of buyers by making prices the same for everyone after hours. Also, the rule shortened the traders’ work hours, for the convenience of its members.
Bargaining power is the relative power of parties in a situation to exert influence over each other. If both parties are on an equal footing in a debate, then they will have equal bargaining power, such as in a perfectly competitive market, or between an evenly matched monopoly and monopsony. There are a number of fields where the concept of bargaining power has proven crucial to coherent analysis, including game theory, labour economics, collective bargaining arrangements, diplomatic negotiations, settlement of litigation, the price of insurance, and any negotiation in general.
Similarly, the employers' surplus is the area between the horizontal line corresponding to the wage and the MRP curve, up to the employment level. The social surplus is then the sum of these two areas. Following such definitions, the grey rectangle, in the diagram, is the part of the competitive social surplus that has been redistributed from the workers to their employer(s) under monopsony. By contrast, the yellow triangle is the part of the competitive social surplus that has been lost by both parties, as a result of the monopsonistic restriction of employment.
Protests and verbal abuse are routinely aimed against union members or replacement workers who cross picket lines ("blacklegs" or "scabs") during industrial disputes. The inherent aim of a union is to create a labor monopoly so as to balance the monopsony a large employer enjoys as a purchaser of labor. Strikebreakers threaten that goal and undermine the union's bargaining position, and occasionally this erupts into violent confrontation, with violence committed either by, or against, strikers. Some who have sought to explain such violence observe, if labor disputes are accompanied by violence, it may be because labor has no legal redress.
Augustus Owsley Stanley I (May 21, 1867 – August 12, 1958) was an American politician from Kentucky. A member of the Democratic Party, he served as the 38th Governor of Kentucky and also represented the state in both the U.S. House of Representatives and the U.S. Senate. From 1903 to 1915, Stanley represented Kentucky's 2nd congressional district in the House of Representatives, where he gained a reputation as a progressive reformer. Beginning in 1904, he called for an antitrust investigation of the American Tobacco Company, claiming they were a monopsony that drove down prices for the tobacco farmers of his district.
The Canadian Wheat Board () was a marketing board for wheat and barley in Western Canada. Established by the Parliament of Canada on 5 July 1935, its operation was governed by the Canadian Wheat Board Act as a mandatory producer marketing system for wheat and barley in Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and a small part of British Columbia. It was illegal for any farmer in areas under the CWB's jurisdiction to sell their wheat and barley through any other channel than the CWB. Although often called a monopoly, it was actually a monopsony since it was the only buyer of wheat and barley.
Commentators also point out that, even if the ruling's Lochner era legal analysis is appropriate and correctly applied, Mackay Radio is flawed due to the economic assumptions the Court made. Justice Roberts' opinion assumed perfect competition in labor markets, a lack of monopsony, no statistical discrimination, no information asymmetry, market rationality, and a legal regime which provided a level playing field and equal protection under the law. Some—and possibly all—of these assumptions are incorrect. Worse, however, the Mackay Radio decision fashioned strong incentives which made it rational for one bargainer (management) to refuse to cooperate and opt out of bargaining.
A Command of Cooperatives. The New Zealand Dairy Board: Wellington By the end of the 1990s, there were only four co-operatives nationwide: the Waikato-based New Zealand Dairy Group, the Taranaki-based Kiwi Co-operative Dairies, Westland Milk Products, and Tatua Co-operative Dairy Company. Fonterra was formed in 2001 from the merger of the two largest co-operatives, New Zealand Dairy Group and Kiwi Co-operative Dairies, together with the New Zealand Dairy Board, which had been the marketing and export agent for all the co-operatives. Fonterra effectively has monopsony control of the New Zealand domestic and export dairy industry.
In Nigeria, the cocoa tree is grown from seedlings which are raised in nurseries, when the seedlings reach a height of 3 cm they are transplanted at a distance of 3 to 4 meters. The cultivation of cocoa is done by many smallscale farmers on farmlands of around 2 hectares while export is dominated by a few firms. Historically Nigeria's cocoa production was marketed through a monopsony by marketing boards created by the government. In the 1980s the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund advised Nigeria to liberalize the sector because the marketing boards were ineffective.
For example, DIVX technology may have failed, in part, because it offered the typical consumer no clear benefit to offset the perceived sacrifice of unlimited viewing time and the cost of having to hook into a phone line. Switching costs are a major reason for pursuing order-of-magnitude improvements in costs, efficiencies, and benefits to the consumer. This business strategy has been called Andy Grove's 10x rule. Where switching costs for a buyer are prohibitively high, the situation can be modelled as a monopoly, for a seller, a monopsony, and for both, a bilateral monopoly.
Kroger took the idea one step further and pioneered the first supermarket surrounded on all four sides by a parking lot. As larger chain supermarkets began to dominate the market in the US, able to supply consumers with the desired lower prices as opposed to the smaller "mom and pop" stands with considerably more overhead costs, the backlash of this infrastructure alteration was seen through numerous anti-chain campaigns. The idea of "monopsony", proposed by Cambridge economist Joan Robinson in 1933, that a single buyer could out-power the market of multiple sellers, became a strong anti-chain rhetorical device.
This is true because each point on the demand curve answers the question, "If buyers are faced with this potential price, how much of the product will they purchase?" But, if a buyer has market power (that is, the amount he buys influences the price), he is not "faced with" any given price, and we must use a more complicated model, of monopsony. As with supply curves, economists distinguish between the demand curve for an individual and the demand curve for a market. The market demand curve is obtained by adding the quantities from the individual demand curves at each price.
A monopsonist employer maximizes profits by choosing the employment level L, that equates the marginal revenue product (MRP) to the marginal cost MC, at point A. The wage is then determined on the labour supply curve, at point M, and is equal to w. By contrast, a competitive labour market would reach equilibrium at point C, where labour supply S equals demand. This would lead to employment L' and wage w'. The standard textbook monopsony model of a labour market is a static partial equilibrium model with just one employer who pays the same wage to all the workers.
Some employers may expect that employees with no fear of losing their jobs will not work as hard or will demand increased wages and benefit. According to that theory, unemployment may promote general labour productivity and profitability by increasing employers' rationale for their monopsony-like power (and profits). Optimal unemployment has also been defended as an environmental tool to brake the constantly- accelerated growth of the GDP to maintain levels that are sustainable in the context of resource constraints and environmental impacts. However, the tool of denying jobs to willing workers seems a blunt instrument for conserving resources and the environment.
Union violence most typically occurs in specific situations, and has more frequently been aimed at preventing replacement workers from taking jobs during a strike, than at managers or employers. Protest and verbal abuse are routinely aimed against union members or replacement workers who cross picket lines ("blacklegs") during industrial disputes. The inherent aim of a union is to create a labor monopoly so as to balance the monopsony a large employer enjoys as a purchaser of labor. Strikebreakers threaten that goal and undermine the union's bargaining position, and occasionally this erupts into violent confrontation, with violence committed either by, or against, strikers.
Alongside peer entities such as Atari and Cisco Systems, Apple was featured in the documentary Something Ventured, which premiered in 2011 and explored the three-decade era that led to the establishment and dominance of Silicon Valley. It has been argued that Apple has achieved such efficiency in its supply chain that the company operates as a monopsony (one buyer with many sellers) and can dictate terms to its suppliers. In July 2011, due to the American debt-ceiling crisis, Apple's financial reserves were briefly larger than those of the U.S. Government. On August 24, 2011, Jobs resigned his position as CEO of Apple.
These results are often explained as being the result of cross-industry competition. For example, if there were only one fast food producer, that industry would be very consolidated. But that company would be unable to drive down wages via monopsonistic power if it were also competing against retail stores, construction, and other jobs utilizing the same labour skill set. This finding is both intuitive (low-skilled labour can move more fluidly through different industries) and supported by the data which found that monopsony effects are limited to professional sports, and perhaps nursing, fields where skill sets limit moving to comparably paid other industries.
Portugal moved from a situation of monopsony (only one buyer and many sellers -typical of arms procurement) to a situation of monopoly (only one seller). It has been stated that Patria proposed the only vehicle that did not show the requested operational capabilities. The fact that the company gave its price offer after the deadline, knowing that this might have disqualified Patria from the tender, was also interpreted as a desire to avoid the final tests with the Portuguese Military, since the results could have harmed Patria's international image. However. this interpretation of Patria's intentions is not consistent with Patria's successive actions, especially with Patria's public legal appeal against the decision of the Ministry of Defense.
Such points > are shrouded in eternal darkness—unless we make our consumer a monopsonist > and let him choose between goods lying on a very convex "budget curve" > (along which he is affecting the price of what he buys). In this monopsony > case, we could still deduce the slope of the man's indifference curve from > the slope of the observed constraint at the equilibrium point. For the epigraph to their seventh chapter, "Markets with non-convex preferences and production" presenting , quote John Milton's description of the (non-convex) Serbonian Bog in Paradise Lost (Book II, lines 592–594): > A gulf profound as that Serbonian Bog > Betwixt Damiata and Mount Casius old, > Where Armies whole have sunk. according to Diewert.
In perfectly competitive markets, no participants are large enough to have the market power to set the price of a homogeneous product. In other words, every participant is a "price taker" as no participant influences the price of a product. In the real world, markets often experience imperfect competition. Forms include monopoly (in which there is only one seller of a good), duopoly (in which there are only two sellers of a good), oligopoly (in which there are few sellers of a good), monopolistic competition (in which there are many sellers producing highly differentiated goods), monopsony (in which there is only one buyer of a good), and oligopsony (in which there are few buyers of a good).
The researchers examined possible reasons and concluded that input costs were high (salaries, cost of pharmaceutical), and that the complex payment system in the U.S. added higher administrative costs. Comparison countries in Canada and Europe were much more willing to exert monopsony power to drive down prices, whilst the highly fragmented buy side of the U.S. health system was one factor that could explain the relatively high prices in the United States of America. The current fee-for-service payment system also stimulates expensive care by promoting procedures over visits through financially rewarding the former ($1,500 – for doing a 10-minute procedure) vs. the latter ($50 – for a 30–45 minute visit).
Economists have subsequently characterized the NCAA as a cartel and collusive monopsony. Pro- rating payouts to Division I basketball players in proportion to the size of revenues its championship tournament generates relative to the NCAA's total annual revenues would be one possible approach, but will open the door to litigation by students and schools adversely affected by such a formula. According to a national study by the National College Players Association (NCPA) and the Drexel University Sport Management Department, the average FBS “full” athletic scholarship falls short of the full cost of attending each school by an average of $3285 during 2011–12 school year, and leaves the vast majority of full scholarship players living below the federal poverty line.
The Competition Amendment Act, 2018 broke new ground on competition policy, with a focus on addressing economic concentration and abuse of dominance, including stronger statutory provisions on price discrimination, predatory pricing, excessive prices and abuse of buyer power (monopsony). The Infrastructure Development Act, 2014 provided a statutory framework for the integration of economic and social infrastructure in the country. He has represented South Africa in BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) Summits and at the World Economic Forum in Davos. Mr Patel was maintained as Minister of Economic Development in the first Cabinet of President Cyril Ramaphosa between February 2018 and May 2019, before being appointed to the expanded portfolio of Trade, Industry and Competition in May 2019.
This causes the proliferation of specialists (more expensive care) and creating, what Don Berwick refers to as, "the world's best healthcare system for rescue care". Other studies have found no consistent and systematic relationship between the type of financing of health care and cost containment; the efficiency of operation of the health care system itself appears to depend much more on how providers are paid and how the delivery of care is organized than on the method used to raise these funds. Some supporters argue that government involvement in health care would reduce costs not just because of the exercise of monopsony power, e.g. in drug purchasing, but also because it eliminates profit margins and administrative overhead associated with private insurance, and because it can make use of economies of scale in administration.
In his Post review, Smith suggested that Disney prevent this by taking the opposite course, simply ignoring Escape from Tomorrow and letting the attention dissipate by itself.Sundance review: 'Escape from Tomorrow' - New York Post Michael Ryan, director of The YoungCuts Film Festival, noted that there was a precedent for the film in the Air Pirates lawsuit, in which Disney spent eight years in court with some underground cartoonists who had published an underground comix parody in which Mickey Mouse and the other Disney characters engaged in explicit sex and used illegal drugs, among other behavior they avoided in Disney's own narratives. He suggested that Disney buy the rights and release the film itself, which it could easily do as its announced interest would guarantee it a monopsony on the film since no other distributor would want to match Disney's deep pockets or its feared legal response. As a Disney release, Escape from Tomorrow would have a large potential audience of both Disney enthusiasts and antagonists, Disney would be making money from property it already owns instead of someone else and the company's apparent willingness to go in the joke would take some of the satiric edge off.

No results under this filter, show 159 sentences.

Copyright © 2024 RandomSentenceGen.com All rights reserved.