why wheat market is a perfect competition market?
370998
perfect competition is a theoretical thing, where you assume all consumers have all the information they need, and all prices are the same and the quality is the same, and that there is perfect mobility in the market.\nthe wheat market is considered perfectly competitive because there is no way for the suppliers to differntiate the wheat they produce form other wheat. therefore they can only compete through price as wheat is homogeneous.
136008
Salt is abundant enough for its price to be standardized, and as everybody has the need to buy it, there aren't any close substitutes but everyone only needs a small amount of it, it's demand is not elastic, that is unless you count demographic explosion which makes the demand grow
1113813
USA aluminium\nChina and Russia leading in Wheat
552533
It's really more of an Oligopolistic market ... few large companies who have Monopolistic powers in select markets.\n\nMonopolies aren't always bad.  In some cases, there is sufficient demand for a good or service, however, if divided among multiple suppliers, it is not cost effective to provide ... in other words ... the cost of laying the infrastructure is such that an incremental sale does not cover the incremental revenue !\n\nThe whole concept of Marginal Cost and Marginal Benefit is thrown out and the market fails.\n\nThese companies are granted rights by the FCC and their performance, both service wise and profit wise are reviewed and monitored.  Their prices are also regulated.\n\nThere are alternatives such as Satalite TV, etc.  Most of us don't opt for them because the quality isn't what you can get from a cable.\n\nThink about it in terms of the railroads and the old west.  If one railroad went through the expense of putting in a track to a town, it made little sense for another railroad to do the same ... yet the folks in the town had no choice if they wanted to ship anything in or out.\n\nEventually, technology (i.e. the Automobile and Plane) eventually eroded this.\n\nAs the technology improves, with WIFI and Satalite reception, larger and larger amounts of data will be able to be transmitted without the need for as much physical infrastructure.\n\nYou are absolutely correct.  They pretty much do have a monopoly within specific geographic areas.  Remember, however, that they were the one's who paid the cost of installing that cable to your home ...\n\nThis was a very good question.  I've used the cable companies as examples of Oligopoly (not Monopoly) when I taught college Economics.
586126
Because a market place is aready a crowded place you have all sorts of people there.
799640
wolfia and azolla compete with lemna\n\nsupposedly compete with livestock and damage wheat and other small grains\n\n:> peace
359569
Communication played the primary role in the market revolution.  Good and fast communications is a requirement for the market to function well.  Before advanced communication, markets developed slowly, because only a small number of people could participate in them.
972556
I would focus on an awareness campaign among young, health-concious yuppies (you know, the granola-types who shop at specialty health-food stores).  The castor oil market is competitive because there is no differentiation between brands, but the market is not deeply penetrated.  I haven't done the research, but I think that these days it is something that only senior citizens use.  You could focus a multi-dimensional campaign on a new generation of potential users.
432020
The biggest problem is Price fixing.  Naturally when two or more companies are competing for business this competition will drive down prices for their product or service.  This benefits the consumer.  If there is collusion between these companies they can set the prices without regard to competition.
212100
Why?  That is the nature of competition.  There are only so many consumer dollars out there (or yen, or pounds, or whatever), and you have to know what other people are offering in order to choose what you will offer for those dollars or whatever.  So, for example, you may want to offer something similar, but at a better price, or something of higher quality in the same category, or with greater variety in colors and styles, whatever.  You have to have information because you can bet those guys are going to have information about what you are doing, and try to cut into your customer base.  The law of supply and demand!
464982
Because they produce less quantity at a higher price than with perfect competetion.  This is not Pareto optimal.\n\nAlso, they might become complacent and stop innovating because there's no real incentive without competition.
926183
The first answer is yes.  \n\nIn perfect competition when price is greater than MC then the producer will still produce.  I don’t know what you mean by taxing.  The perfect competitor will sell as many units as it can produce before marginal cost exceeds demand.  So the answer is No if you mean are they collecting more consumer surplus.  \n\nA monopoly is able to raise the price above equilibrium.  Therefore it reduces the amount of goods it generates to equal the maximum profit point (the quantity where MC = MR). This is always less quantity than the equilibrium and therefore the price is higher per unit.  The reason it is the profit maximizing point is because it allows the company to capture some of the consumer surplus and therefore make more profit.  If there was more competition there would be firms fighting the monopoly and undercutting thier profit maximizing point, thereby reducing economic profit and giving more value to the consumers.  \n\nYour question is not totally clear but I believe that is what you are asking.
584480
wheat contains a multitude of different molecules from oxygen and water to proteins and dna.
1042896
I don't get it, either.  When things go on sale at the supermarket, everyone goes to get stuff, so why isn't it the same for the Stock Market?  Beats me.  That sheep thing is about right.
697407
This is a question out of macro economics (national economics) and this is discussed since 300 years.\n\nImagine a market as a square, on every corner you have one participant, they are: consumer/individuals, goverment/state/towns, companies, foreign trade (import and export of goods). Between this 4 corners is a flow of money: e.g. paid money for purchases, income for work, taxes and a "physical" stream (work hours, goods and services), so called "transfers" e.g. social security/welfare/, infrastructure (streets/schools/universities) and others. Try to write this on a paper.\n\nIn a perfect market economy (Adam Smith: Wealth of Nations) there is no regulation between the four corners, the market is called " the invisible hand" and on the longterm takes care of all and everything. This would be the perfect market economy. This is only a model, there are some conditions that this would work: Every aprticipants has perfect knowledge of the market conditions and all alternatives (you want the dress now not in 20 years) , would be able to shift demands depending on market conditions (but when you are hungry you have to eat), and and and ....\n\nThe other extreme is: all transactions are perfectly coordinated by one authority (with perfect knwoledge of everything at everytime): also not possible.\n\nBoth are "models" which do not exist in reality, all national economies are "mixed": they contain certain regulations. In a democracy this regulations are by law and law is made by the elected representatives (House and Senat). So the question is: howmuch regulation you create and what are the intentions and values behind your decision.\n\nIf you understand this you can play with the possible regulations and find pro's and con's.\n\nHere some regulations in the US:\n\nMinumum wage paid to workers\nWelfare/Negative Income Tax\nAnti-Trust Laws\nBuilding of streets \nSocial Security (paid from a certain age)\nUnemployment\nAffirmative action/Anti discrimination laws\nSubsidizing of e.g. certain areas of research (e.g. military)\n\n(The above list does not express any statement what my perosonal opinion about this is.)
454240
The following sites give the answer:\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfect_competition\nhttp://instruct1.cit.cornell.edu/courses/ha191/slides/monopoly.ppt
535344
In surveys of micro and small enterprises throughout the world, the enterprises consistently identify "the market constraint" as a principal factor inhibiting their growth. The market constraint is identified in the surveys as "highly competitive markets" for undifferentiated products, "too few customers", "low margins/profitability".