74.

Candidates running for office may have to position themselves differently (along the political spectrum) in primary
elections than in the general election.  Explain. 
Basically the difference between the general election and the primaries is in the primary a Dem candidate will have to be
more liberal to win but if selected out of the primaries will have to move towards the right.(Towards both the median voter
and Rep.)
For a Rep= more conservative in primaries then move more to the left (liberal) in the general election. This may appear to
look flip flop-ish to voters which is why no competition in the primaries is a good thing because a person can get a head
start on general election because they didn’t have to go from one side of spectrum in primaries to the other in general
election.

75. “With drop-outs, a two-party system need not lead to the median voter.”  Do you agree or disagree?  Explain your
answer. 
Agree but only in a biomodal model. This is because in a biomodal distributions with drop outs as more people drop out
trying to move to the median voter you lose more than you gain by moving go the middle voters so candidates will stay far
away from each other.

76. Some voter distributions under some conditions are more likely to bring about either revolution or secession than other
voter distributions under other conditions.  Do you agree or disagree?  Explain your answer.
Agree. In normal distribution voting with or without dropouts the candidates will occupy the median voters to win. (With
drop outs they still have more to gain than lose by moving towards the median voter.) Both candidates are close to each
other still. However in Biomodal voting WITH dropout’s downs believed that this could lead to revolution because the
voters are far away from each other not occupying the median voter. (Because in this model they have less to gain and
more to lose by moving towards the median voters.) For this reason candidates will be far away from each other and many
people will be mad at outcome. This environment could lead to a revolution.
77. Suppose the voter distribution is a normal distribution and there are no drop-outs.  What is the equilibrium number of
major political parties?  Explain your answer. 
The equilibrium number of voters will be two. This is because a 3 rd party can act as a spoiler for one of the two major
parties depending on where that 3rd party is located. For example if 3rd party is located on the left side of the median voter
close to the Democratic Party that 3rd party can make the republicans win. Or if 3rd party is on right side with rep it can
make Dems win.
78. Do you think that it is true that there is a limit to the number of political parties which can be supported by any
particular voter distribution?  Explain your answer. 
Yes. The answer is two major political parties. Two because 3rd can play as a spoiler to the major party that it is on the
same side with. 3rd party just basically buts the legs off the major party side it’s on. It steals votes away from the major
party even though it has no chance of winning and ultimately will lead to the other major party victory.
79. What might the shape of the voter distribution depend upon?  Explain your answer. 
The shape of the voter distribution depends on the different level of contention.
80. Explain how minor 3rd parties can act as both spoiler and blackmail parties. 
3rd parties can play spoiler to the major party they share sides with on the voting distribution. By being on same side as a
major political party and ultimately taking votes away from that party. Also if the 3 rd party votes truthfully their 3rdpick will
win. For example lets say 3rd party is a libertarian party to the right of the Rep party. The Libertrian party will vote in this
order 1= 3rd party, 2= Rep 3= Dem. Voting truthfully this way, Dem wins. 3rd party can vote strategically and vote for 2nd
best win rather than vote truthfully and last place choice wins.
They can also black mail by telling the major party they are next to, to pay them a certain amount of money or they will
vote truthfully.(Again, by doing this the last place choice wins.) For example if they 3rd party is next to the democratic
party, if they do not pay the 3rd party off, by the 3rd party voting truthfully, the REPS will win. How much is the major party
willing to pay for the 3rd party to vote strategically?
81. There is a difference between a person's vote affecting and determining the vote outcome.  Explain. 
The difference between affecting the vote and determining the vote is you will 100% of the time affect the vote but may
never never (with very very small chance) determine the vote. Determine= Tie Breaker, because “you” voted you broke
the tie and determined winner.
Affecting vote outcome =100%
82. What does the PFV equal? 
PFV= BENEFITS OF VOTING-COST OF VOTING. Or broken down, PFC = [ P(Bb-Bw) + BP] – CV. WHERE P= probability
that your vote DETERMINES outcome. And Bb=Benefits of Best candidate winning, Bw= Benefits if worst candidate wins
and BP=benefits of voting, CV= cost of voting.
83. Downs argued that the number of major political parties is dependent upon the voter distribution and whether or not
there are dropouts.  Explain. 
84. Downs argued that representative democracy is not guaranteed to produce a mainstream (neither far left nor far right)
system of government.  Explain.  
85. What is the difference between rational ignorance and ignorance?
Rational ignorance is having the capability to learn something but choosing not to. Rational ignorance is a choice to remain
uninformed. While Ignorance is just not having the ability to learn something. One is a choice the other is the inability to
do or learn something.
86. In what settings are people most likely to be rationally ignorant?  least likely to be rationally ignorant?  Explain your
answers.
Voters are more likely to be rationally ignorant in respect to government and political issues. Possibly less likely to be
rationally ignorant for taking a test in 411 where the outcome largely depends on your actions.
87. What does rational ignorance have to do with the probability of an individual voter determining the outcome of an
election? 
It has to do with the fact that median voters are likely to be rationally ignorant. If this is the case you have candidates who
are competing for the votes of some rationally ignorant people. Two different candidates can have two different opinions
are tariffs. One can believe tariffs hurt the country and one can believe they help the country. The outcome of the election
could be with who explains it better rather than who is actually right because voters are don’t want to look it up(rationally
ignorant), These voters are also easy to misinform. These voters also allow “stick” factors deter them. Example =tying
your opponent to a rape scandal. Opponent will be on the defensive.
88. According to economist Bryan Caplan, why are so many people likely to be economically illiterate? People tend to defer
to experts in things they are far away from. (Physics, climate change etc) but people who deal with economic principles
everyday such as wages, prices, jobs, trades etc they mistakenly believe they know more about economics than they
actually do.
89. Economic illiteracy may not matter on an individual basis, but it does matter on a group/society/aggregate basis.  Do
you agree or disagree?  Also, "matter to what"? 

90. According to Tullock, the cost of monopoly is greater than simply the deadweight loss triangle.  Explain.
91. What is rent seeking? 
92. A transfer from one group to another (within a given society) doesn't make society better off or worse off, but using
resources to bring about the transfer does make society worse off.  Do you agree or disagree?  Explain your answer.
93. Consider two different countries, A and B.  In A, the breakdown between rent seeking and producing is 50:50.  In B,
the breakdown between rent seeking and producing is 10:90.  Does the breakdown between rent seeking and producing
matter to the well-being and wealth of a country?  Explain your answer. 
94. What is the difference between profit seeking and rent seeking?  
Profit seeking is when certain things are being done. For example 1: Satisfying new demand. (A good or service that
doesn’t exist yet that you think there is a demand for.)
2. Take something that exist and add value to it. EX: I phone 8 to 9, people won’t buy the 9 if it is exactly the same as the
8 so why do people buy it? New features = new demand
3. Lowering cost( without effecting quality)
Rent seeking is transfer seeking, going for transfer. Ex: Cost of moving from perfectly competitive market to monopoly.
(Figuring out if there is exchanges that people want that they aren’t making if there is profit to be made.