Home
Search results “Horizontal mergers an equilibrium analysis american economic review”
Horizontal Merger Guidelines Review Project Workshop: Introduction
 
08:57
The Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission held the first of two joint public workshops at NYU School of Law to explore the possibility of updating the Horizontal Merger Guidelines that are used by both agencies to evaluate the potential competitive effects of mergers and acquisitions. The goal of the workshops will be to determine whether the Horizontal Merger Guidelines accurately reflect the current practice of merger review at the Department and the FTC as well as to take into account legal and economic developments that have occurred since the last significant Guidelines revision in 1992.
Views: 673 NYU School of Law
Horizontal Merger Guidelines Review Project Workshop: Panel 5
 
01:00:33
Panel 5, General Discussion and Roundtable, from the 2009 Horizontal Merger Guidelines Review Project Workshop.
Views: 227 NYU School of Law
Law and Economics LLM
 
03:08
Dr Leon Vinokur, Professor Rodrigo Olivares-Caminal, and Professor Ioannis Kokkoris discuss the advantages of MSc Law and Economics at Queen Mary University of London. Subscribe to the official Queen Mary, University of London channel - bringing you breakthrough research findings and enhanced student life, teaching and learning. http://www.youtube.com/QMULOfficial
Views: 1943 QMULOfficial
Development Economics at AU
 
02:48
Learn more about the development economics program at American University's College of Arts and Sciences. Faculty and students discuss what sets this program apart from others. More information about the program can be found at http://www.american.edu/cas/economics/index.cfm. Video by undergraduate student David Lewis.
Views: 321 AUcollege
Wall Street Greed: Financial Crises Since 3500 BCE (CC)
 
01:26:14
Notes for Economics www.saseassociates.com In this video, we explore the the history of 19th-century thought and apply it to an analysis financial crises from Sumerian times to the present age. The take-away is that these economic booms and busts have continued to occur and reoccur over the millenia. Therefore, to sketch the profound changes of economic cycles we turn to some of the more esoteric economic thought to explore the subject in the context of multi-millenial Cultural and Empire Cycles all the way down to the more conventional Business Cycle. To accomplish this task, we review the economic, social, political, and cultural thoughts of polymaths such as Jeremy Bentham, John Stuart Mill, Johann von Goethe, John Ruskin, Benjamin Diraeli, Rudolf Steiner, and others and incorporate their own words into our in-depth discussion. Through this approach, we demonstrate that in respect to the most recent economic crisis, 1. This time is NOT different, and 2. These cycles of multiple interweaving lengths extend back throughout human history as far as we can measure. WARNING: This is an esoteric approach to the understanding of economic cycles. First, we explore the economic thought and observations of a group of polymaths from the past and present centuries. Then, we apply their ideas to trace the rise and fall of economies at the level of Empire Cycles down to the more mundane but shorter Business Cycle.
Views: 13370 Video Economist
Chapter 10 Monopoly and Competition
 
05:01:25
Man, Economy, and State with Power and Market by Murray N. Rothbard (narrated by Jeff Riggenbach) CHAPTER 10 MONOPOLY AND COMPETITION 0:05 1. The Concept of Consumers’ Sovereignty 0:10 A. Consumers’ Sovereignty versus Individual Sovereignty 4:52 B. Professor Hutt and Consumers’ Sovereignty 20:30 2. Cartels and Their Consequences 20:35 A. Cartels and “Monopoly Price” 37:57 B. Cartels, Mergers, and Corporations C. Economics, Technology, and the Size of the Firm D. The Instability of the Cartel E. Free Competition and Cartels F. The Problem of One Big Cartel 1:24:35 3. The Illusion of Monopoly Price A. Definitions of Monopoly B. The Neoclassical Theory of Monopoly Price C. Consequences of Monopoly-Price Theory D. The Illusion of Monopoly Price on the Unhampered Market E. Some Problems in the Theory of the Illusion of Monopoly Price 3:16:02 4. Labor Unions A. Restrictionist Pricing of Labor B. Some Arguments for Unions: A Critique 3:49:41 5. The Theory of Monopolistic or Imperfect Competition A. Monopolistic Competitive Price B. The Paradox of Excess Capacity C. Chamberlin and Selling Cost 4:22:32 6. Multiform Prices and Monopoly 4:39:45 7. Patents and Copyrights Playlist: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLOCWSOHhjJPU7cP6jupp0C_hbs4eT5CnN Download and read here: https://mises.org/library/man-economy-and-state-power-and-market Robert Murphy’s Study Guide: https://mises.org/library/study-guide-man-economy-and-state Chapter Summary: Consumer preferences ultimately drive a market economy; many have termed this outcome as “consumers’ sovereignty.” Yet this is an inappropriate political metaphor; on a free market, individuals have complete control over their bodies and other property. Cartels allegedly restrict output below the socially optimum level. But consider the “worst case” where a cartel destroys some of its product. Even here, the true “waste” is not the destroyed product, but rather the scarce resources that went into the production of the excess units; once the cartel produces the profit-maximizing amount in the future, these resources will be channeled elsewhere. Moreover, the formation of a cartel in the first place is quite similar to the founding of a corporation or a merger, yet many view only the cartel as inefficient. In a free market, firms will tend to be the optimum size. Lower unit costs of large-scale production will tend to increase firm size, but the overhead costs of bureaucracy eventually check this trend. The ultimate limit is the chaos that would ensue if a firm eliminated the market prices for its inputs and products. Voluntary cartels formed for the purpose of restricting output and raising prices are inherently unstable. There will always be an incentive to cheat on the cartel agreement and produce more than the assigned quota. Even if the members of the cartel can reach an agreement and obey it, if they are truly earning “above normal” returns, outsiders will enter the industry. A monopoly may be defined as (1) a single seller of a good or service, (2) the recipient of a government privilege, or (3) a business unit that can achieve monopoly prices. The first definition is vacuous; everyone is a monopolist in this sense. The second definition is legitimate, and focuses on government intervention that hampers welfare. The third definition is empty once we realize there is no such thing as “monopoly price.” Simply put, there is no such thing as a “monopoly price” to which we can contrast a “competitive price”; there is no way we can even in principle define these concepts. All we can discuss is the unhampered price that would emerge on a free market. Although a union presents a coherent example of restriction of output and the achievement of higher prices, this is not an example of monopoly; the privileged workers gain at the expense of nonunion members. A typical argument for unions is that the marginal productivity determination of wage rates, in practice, leads not to a unique value but rather a zone of possible wage rates. The problem with such a justification is that such zones of indeterminacy shrink as more and more people enter the market. Moreover, in practice unions often rely on the actual use (or at least threat) of violence to achieve such “bar- gains” with management. The crucial characteristic of a “perfectly competitive” industry is that each firm perceives the demand for its product as a horizontal line. Yet this is clearly absurd; even in theory, all demand curves must be downward sloping. The claims of “excess capacity” in monopolistically competitive industries defy rationality and ultimately rely on geometrical tricks: Once we drop the assumption of smooth cost curves, the argument falls apart.
Views: 248 Sam Warner
Strategy: Exam Help 2
 
01:06
More tips for my strategy students for their exam at the best economics faculty in portugal FE UNL Nova...
Views: 1004 Mark Wolters
Peter Joseph's "Where are we going"
 
02:00:37
Peter Joseph's November 15th 2009 presentation, given at Maharishi University (Fairfield, Iowa). http://www.thezeitgeistmovement.com/ Embedding & sharing is highly encouraged. Note: This LTI Repository location contains only "official", fully proofread versions of the transcript & its derived translations. More translations will be added as they are completed. If your language is not yet represented here, consider helping these efforts by joining your language team at http://bit.ly/Zj0QWC (LTI Forum).
Parents of the Field: Dan Druckman
 
01:44:53
Daniel Druckman’s work originally arose from his initial interest in negotiation behavior, but his writings cover a huge range of topics within that overall focus, including work on nationalism, the politics of base rights negotiation, the practice of peacekeeping and political conflict. His career included work for research organizations and in academia. http://scar.gmu.edu/parents
IU DS Speakers Fall 2017 Kuansan Wang
 
01:18:38
Kuansan Wang of Microsoft lectures on machine learning and how it has advanced in terms of searching through scientific and academic papers.
Views: 31 IU Data Science
Auburn Coach Wife Kristi Malzahn Agrees with Match & eHarmony: Men are Jerks
 
12:23
My advice is this: Settle! That's right. Don't worry about passion or intense connection. Don't nix a guy based on his annoying habit of yelling "Bravo!" in movie theaters. Overlook his halitosis or abysmal sense of aesthetics. Because if you want to have the infrastructure in place to have a family, settling is the way to go. Based on my observations, in fact, settling will probably make you happier in the long run, since many of those who marry with great expectations become more disillusioned with each passing year. (It's hard to maintain that level of zing when the conversation morphs into discussions about who's changing the diapers or balancing the checkbook.) Obviously, I wasn't always an advocate of settling. In fact, it took not settling to make me realize that settling is the better option, and even though settling is a rampant phenomenon, talking about it in a positive light makes people profoundly uncomfortable. Whenever I make the case for settling, people look at me with creased brows of disapproval or frowns of disappointment, the way a child might look at an older sibling who just informed her that Jerry's Kids aren't going to walk, even if you send them money. It's not only politically incorrect to get behind settling, it's downright un-American. Our culture tells us to keep our eyes on the prize (while our mothers, who know better, tell us not to be so picky), and the theme of holding out for true love (whatever that is—look at the divorce rate) permeates our collective mentality. Even situation comedies, starting in the 1970s with The Mary Tyler Moore Show and going all the way to Friends, feature endearing single women in the dating trenches, and there's supposed to be something romantic and even heroic about their search for true love. Of course, the crucial difference is that, whereas the earlier series begins after Mary has been jilted by her fiancé, the more modern-day Friends opens as Rachel Green leaves her nice-guy orthodontist fiancé at the altar simply because she isn't feeling it. But either way, in episode after episode, as both women continue to be unlucky in love, settling starts to look pretty darn appealing. Mary is supposed to be contentedly independent and fulfilled by her newsroom family, but in fact her life seems lonely. Are we to assume that at the end of the series, Mary, by then in her late 30s, found her soul mate after the lights in the newsroom went out and her work family was disbanded? If her experience was anything like mine or that of my single friends, it's unlikely. And while Rachel and her supposed soul mate, Ross, finally get together (for the umpteenth time) in the finale of Friends, do we feel confident that she'll be happier with Ross than she would have been had she settled down with Barry, the orthodontist, 10 years earlier? She and Ross have passion but have never had long-term stability, and the fireworks she experiences with him but not with Barry might actually turn out to be a liability, given how many times their relationship has already gone up in flames. It's equally questionable whether Sex and the City's Carrie Bradshaw, who cheated on her kindhearted and generous boyfriend, Aidan, only to end up with the more exciting but self-absorbed Mr. Big, will be better off in the framework of marriage and family. (Some time after the breakup, when Carrie ran into Aidan on the street, he was carrying his infant in a Baby Björn. Can anyone imagine Mr. Big walking around with a Björn?)
Views: 174403 Shari Wing
Peter Joseph - Où allons-nous ? - 15 novembre 2009
 
02:00:37
Conférence : Où allons-nous ? ("Where are we going ?") par Peter Joseph, Mouvement Zeitgeist - Université de Maharishi, Iowa - 15 novembre 2009. Cette conférence est la suite de celle donnée à Londres par Peter Joseph le 25 juillet 2009, "Où en sommes-nous aujourd'hui ?" : http://youtu.be/F2NAqQfVtBg * Partie 1 : Bagages évolutionnaires * Partie 2 : Concept Terre http://mouvement-zeitgeist.fr http://thezeitgeistmovement.com/ Pour activer les sous-titres en français, cliquez sur le bouton "Sous-titres" dans la fenêtre du lecteur.
¿Hacia donde vamos? - Segunda Parte
 
01:17:11
RECOMENDAMOS LEER LA DESCRIPCIÓN DE ESTE VIDEO Antes de ver este video es recomendable haber leído o visto la Guía de Orientación, ya que se asume que están familiarizados con los conceptos que se van a explicar, si no lo están, no se sorprendan si algo suena extremadamente extraño. (AL HACER CLIC EN LOS TIEMPOS DEL VIDEO ANOTADAS EN ESTA DESCRIPCIÓN LOS DEJARA POSICIONADOS EN LA SECCIÓN QUE DESEAN REPETIR, ES DECIR, SI NECESITAS VOLVER A REVISAR ALGO ESPECIFICO NO ES NECESARIO REVISAR EL VIDEO COMPLETO) Parte 1: Proyecto Tierra 0:00:00 Levantamiento de recursos 0:01:52 Energías Renovables 0:02:35 Distribución y monitorización 0:06:08 El Planeta es un sistema integral 0:08:20 Todos los recursos del planeta gestionados 0:09:57 ¿Qué necesita la gente? 0:11:00 Problemas de escasez de alimentos y agua son 100% económicos 0:12:49 Avance de la tecnología 0:15:38 Presentación del Proyecto Venus 0:16:41 Economía Basada en Recursos 0:18:23 Remover la intervención humana 0:21:49 Entre más productividad menos empleos 0:22:36 Automatización 0:22:58 Caprichos emocionales 0:25:04 Las Maquinas son extensiones de los humanos 0:26:02 ¿Qué voy a hacer si las maquinas hacen las cosas por mi? 0:26:20 Obsolescencia Planificada 0:27:23 ¿Monopolio que no es Monopolio? 0:28:20 Distribución 0:28:56 Reciclaje Óptimo 0:30:17 ¿Gobierno que no es gobierno? 0:31:03 Investigación y Toma de decisiones 0:33:11 Procesos de información 0:34:39 Maquinas hostiles con la humanidad 0:35:31 La política tradicional no tiene fundamento o relevancia 0:37:41 Equipos interdisciplinarios 0:38:36 Encomendamos nuestras vidas a la ciencia y tecnología 0:40:54 Temor de la corrupción 0:41:13 Educación expandida 0:42:17 La especialización es una limitación 0:43:18 ¿Quién toma las decisiones? 0:44:17 Relevancia a lo que se llama "gobierno" 0:45:18 ¿Cuáles son las verdaderas amenazas a la humanidad? 0:45:47 Ciudades y estilo de vida 0:46:19 Presentación Diseñando el futuro 0:46:55 Estilos de vidas 0:53:38 La propiedad es una consecuencia de la escasez 0:54:46 La transición 0:59:00 Definiendo Zeitgeist 1:00:45 La cuestión central es la consciencia 1:03:37 Campaña de concientización masiva 1:09:06 Excelente Conclusión 1:11:45
Views: 493 Canal TZMChile