Question

question 1 (2 points)
what was the significance of the dupont cellophane case?
a) it resulted in the breakup of dupont into smaller companies.
b) it highlighted the importance of defining the relevant market in antitrust cases.
c) it led to the deregulation of the chemical industry.
question 2 (2 points)
which of the following best describes the taste - for - discrimination model?
a) employers always hire the most qualified workers regardless of their background.
b) workers choose jobs based on their personal preferences alone.
c) employers with a preference for certain groups may hire fewer workers from other groups, even at a higher cost.

Explanation:

Question 1

In the DuPont cellophane case, the key was not about breaking up the company (DuPont was not broken up as a result of this case) or deregulating the chemical industry. The case centered around the concept of market definition. Antitrust laws aim to prevent monopolistic behavior. To determine if a company has monopoly power, one must define the relevant market. In the DuPont cellophane case, the Supreme Court emphasized that when defining the market for cellophane, other flexible packaging materials (like aluminum foil, waxed paper) should be considered as part of the relevant market. This showed that proper market - definition is crucial in antitrust cases.

Question 2

The taste - for - discrimination model (developed by Gary Becker) assumes that employers have a 'taste' or preference against certain groups (e.g., based on race, gender). Employers act as if workers from the disliked group have a higher cost. So, even if workers from the disliked group are equally or more qualified, employers with this 'taste' will hire fewer of them. Option a is incorrect because it goes against the premise of the taste - for - discrimination model (employers do not always hire the most qualified if they have a discriminatory 'taste'). Option b is about workers' job - choosing behavior, while the taste - for - discrimination model is about employer behavior.

Answer:

Question 1

B. It highlighted the importance of defining the relevant market in antitrust cases.

Question 2

C. Employers with a preference for certain groups may hire fewer workers from other groups, even at a higher cost.