1.A market economy:

Group of answer choices

distributes property rights.

allocates according to need.

expects people to be self-interested.

requires government to set prices.

2.Which of the following is not a characteristic of pure capitalism?

Group of answer choices

freedom of enterprise.

worker freedom

private ownership of land.

government ownership of capital.

3.Markets coordinate economic activity through:

Group of answer choices

the price mechanism.

commanding individuals what to do.

asking individuals what to do.

the legal mechanism.

4.Suppose that at the current price consumers would like to purchase 10 million large-screen televisions and 15 million are available. When the market coordinates the demand and supply for large-screen televisions, the price of large-screen televisions will:

Group of answer choices

fall

stay the same.

be fixed by the government.

rise

5.Suppose that at the current price producers of CDs offer 5 million CDs for sale but consumers want to buy 6 million. When the market coordinates the demand and supply for CDs, the price of CDs will:

Group of answer choices

fall

stay the same.

rise

be fixed by the government.

6.This is for the Health Insurer article.

Health Insurers

Nearly a third of the nation's counties look likely to have just a single insurer offering health plans on the Affordable Care Act's exchanges next year, according to a new analysis, an industry pullback that adds to the challenges facing the law.

The new study, by the nonpartisan Kaiser Family Foundation(Links to an external site.)

, suggests there could be just one option for coverage in 31% of counties in 2017, and there might be only two in another 31%. That would give exchange customers in large swaths of the U.S. far less choice than they had this year, when 7% of counties had one insurer and 29% had two.

Many insurers are losing money on the health plans they sell through the exchanges, and the fallout is coming into focus. Companies includingUnitedHealth Group(Links to an external site.)

Inc.,(Links to an external site.)

Humana(Links to an external site.)

Inc.(Links to an external site.)

andAetna(Links to an external site.)

Inc.(Links to an external site.)

have cited their losses in withdrawing from ACA marketplaces, as have smaller insurers that have been retreating, or even shutting down.

The insurers that remain are in some cases seeking sharp premium increases for next year, trying to get back in the black amid higher-than-expected costs.

At least one countyPinal in Arizonais at risk of having no insurers offering marketplace plans next year, despite talks between regulators and insurers aimed at filling the void.

Some consumers who don't get coverage through work might be able to buy health plans outside the exchanges, but many lower-income Americans who buy their own plans would be limited to exchange plans. The health law generally requires them to buy such plans to qualify for federal subsidies.

The marketplaces were supposed to hold down prices and expand choice by fostering competition among insurers. Leemore Dafny, a professor at Harvard Business School, says that having a small number of insurers is "likely to lead to a very pricey exchange."

Insurance executives say premiums reflect the cost of care, but in some markets they worry about a cycle of rising prices that might encourage the consumers who need health care least to opt out.

Dr. Dafny says federal subsidies will blunt the impact of premium increases for many consumers.

Most of the likely one-insurer counties are predominantly rural, according to the Kaiser analysis, which updatesone it did in May.(Links to an external site.)

But several urban areas, such as Charlotte, N.C., Philadelphia and Oklahoma City, also face a lack of competition. The analysis suggests that about 19% of current exchange enrollees may have just one option next year; another 19% would have two.

"It's terribly concerning," said Julie Mix McPeak, Tennessee's commissioner of insurance. In most of her state, there will likely be just one exchange insurer next year, after the withdrawal of UnitedHealth; consumers throughout the state had at least two options in 2016.

The Kaiser analysis is the most comprehensive look yet at competition in next year's exchanges. But the number of counties with limited competition is likely to change between now and late September, when insurers have to lock in their plans.

Since Aetna said this month that it would withdraw from 11 of the 14 state exchanges where it markets plans, other insurers have been reassessing their situation, worried they will get stuck with more of the sickest enrollees. Some may seek to rethink their proposed premiums or where they will offer plans.

"All the other carriers say, 'what does that mean for me?'" said Paul Rooney, a vice president ateHealth(Links to an external site.)

Inc.,(Links to an external site.)

a big seller of individual plans.

"A number of steps remain before the full picture of this year's marketplace competition is known, but the ACA has greatly expanded the insurance options available to consumers in the individual marketplace," said Marjorie Connolly, a spokeswoman for the Department of Health and Human Services.

President Barack Obama has called for the creation of a public insurance option to compete alongside private plans in places where competition is limited.

States including Alabama, Alaska, Missouri, Arizona, Florida, North Carolina, Mississippi, Oklahoma and Tennessee are likely to go next year to having one insurer in all or most counties, Kaiser's analysis found. Regulators in those states confirmed the findings, except in Florida and Missouri,where officialssaid they didn't yet have a tally.

UnitedHealth's planned withdrawal from Oklahoma came after two regional insurers bowed out, according to the state's regulator. Aetna, meanwhile, canceled plans to join the state's exchange. The upshot: Only one remaining exchange insurer statewide. "Let's face it, there's no competition," said Mike Rhoads, Oklahoma's deputy insurance commissioner.

Joseph Devoy, a 31-year-old construction worker who lives in Arizona's Pinal County, said he had to switch insurers to UnitedHealth this year after his previous provider, theco-opMeritus, stopped selling plans. Now, with UnitedHealth leaving Arizona, Mr. Devoy, who has to buy coverage through the ACA marketplace to qualify for a federal subsidy, isn't sure if any insurer will be offering a plan he can buy for next year. Without one, he fears he could face a penalty under the law.

"I don't know what to do now," Mr. Devoy said. Even if an insurer does come into Pinal, "at that point, it's amonopoly."

Per the article, if a person doesn't have a health insurance coverage from the ACA marketplace then that person ___________________.

Group of answer choices

will be provided by the federal government for free

will be provided by the state government for free

may face a fine/penalty.

7.This is for the Generic article.

In a health care system notoriously resistant to cost-containment, generic drugs are an exception. Americans enjoy a huge range of generic medicines at-ever declining prices, largely thanks to robust competition among multiple manufacturers.

So how is it that the price of EpiPen, which treats severe allergic reactions, hasjumped sixfold(Links to an external site.)

in eight years? Or the price of Daraprim, a half-century old, unpatented treatment for parasitic infections, was raised 50-fold after being acquired by Turing Pharmaceuticals AG last year?

As it happens, even among generics, business circumstances and regulation can conspire to give one supplier amonopolyit is happy to exploit. Ideally, this should be met not with price controls, but more competitionfrom home and abroad. If the U.S. allowed the sale of drugs that regulators in other advanced countries have already approved, it would expose would-bemonopoliststo many more potential competitors.

In 1984, the Waxman-Hatch Act slashed the regulatory hurdles for generic copies of patented drugs. Since then, generics have risen from 19% to 84% of all prescriptions. Their prices have fallen 70% over the past eight years, while branded prices have risen 164%, according to Express Scripts, a pharmacy benefit manager.

The main driver of those price declines is competition. A 2010study found(Links to an external site.)

that within three yearsof the first generic launch, the average generic has 12 competing suppliers and its price has fallen 94%.

Yet big price increases are hardly unheard of. Onefederal study(Links to an external site.)

found that over one year, roughly 10% of generics (weighted by share of Medicaid purchases) more than doubled in price. The reason is almost always lack of competition. Sometimes one supplier withdraws because of manufacturing problems or low profits, leaving another with leverage to raise prices. In recent years,several companies(Links to an external site.)

have sought to wring more profits out of old drugs by raising prices where alternatives are scarce. When Turing acquired Daraprim, it increased the price from $13.50 per dose to $750.

High prices should be a magnet for new suppliers. But first, generic manufacturers must prove to the Food and Drug Administration that their drug has the same quality, strength, purity and stability as the branded drug. That can be costly and time-consuming. The FDA has faced a growing volume of applications. More than 3,000 filed before October 2014 still await approval; the typical lag between application and approval is four years, according to the Generic Pharmaceutical Association, a trade group. Applications after that date enjoy faster treatment under a special arrangement with the industry.

Daraprim is no longer under patent, and generic versions sell in Canada and Europe for $1 to $3, notes Alex Tabarrok, an economist at George Mason University. But because those drugs aren't approved for sale in the U.S., Turing Chief ExecutiveMartin Shkreliknew that the approval process gave him "a window of opportunity to exploitmonopolypower."

EpiPen uses an automatic injector to deliver a precise dose of epinephrine to patients suffering from a severe allergic reaction, such as to peanuts or an insect sting. After Mylan NV acquired the right to sell EpiPen in 2007, it set out to boost demand by working with schools and public health authorities to increase awareness of the risks of allergic reactions and position EpiPen as their preferred solution.

It isn't a monopoly, but it's close. Injectable medicines are tricky to manufacture. One competitor to EpiPen was withdrawn due to concerns about improper dosage. The FDA has sent back applications for two new competitors as inadequate. One competitor, Adrenaclick, is only slightly cheaper, and in short supply.

Yet inEurope, EpiPen competes with several devices at a fraction of its U.S. list price of $608.61 per pair.Denmark'sALK-Abello(Links to an external site.)

,which specializes in allergy therapies, sells the Jext pen for $34 to $67 throughout Europe, and is interested in selling it in the U.S. "Our decision will be determined by what it takes to obtain FDA approval," says a spokesman.

Both Mylan and Turing have offered discounts. The FDA has also been shrinking its backlog, thanks in part to resources paid for by industry user fees. Mr. Tabarrok says the FDA should also offer reciprocal approval of drugs that regulators in other advanced countries have already cleared. Imports of generics from countries with government-negotiated prices ought not to be as controversial as patent-protected drugs because they involve far less expensive and risky research. Indeed, the Generic Pharmaceutical Association and its European equivalent, Medicines for Europe, have proposed a "single development pathway" under which approval in one jurisdiction would automatically confer approval in the other.

The FDA has long insisted, for safety reasons, that it approve all drugs regardless of whether they have been approved overseas. But if the FDA was once a better regulator than its overseas peers, it isn't now. Ken Kaitin, a professor of medicine at Tufts University who has studied drug regulation around the world, says there is "absolutely no evidence" the U.S. drug supply is safer than in Britain, Canada or Europe.

Thus, the FDA wouldn't be compromising safety by harmonizing its approvals with foreign regulators. Indeed, by making more drugs available at lower cost, it could ultimately make Americans healthier.

Per the article, what is one reason which provides the manufacturer of EpiPen pricing power?

Group of answer choices

The U.S. allowing drugs approved in other advanced countries to be sold in the U.S.

Free trade between Denmark and the U.S.

U.S. government rules and regulation

8.This is for the Drugs article.

BRUSSELSU.S. officials conduct hundreds of inspections of pharmaceutical plants in the European Union each year, duplicating inspections performed by EU authorities. European inspectors do the same in the U.S.

It is a swath of red tape that the drug industry and European regulators hoped would be eliminated as part of negotiations on a sweeping trade and investment deal between the U.S. and the EU. But the U.S. is reluctant to stop its inspections in the EU, fearing that audits done by poorer countries in the 28-nation bloc aren't up to international standards, U.S. and EU officials say.

As negotiators meet in Washington for a fifth round of talks this week, removing trans-Atlantic red tape such as drug inspections is proving to be more difficult than many imagined.

From auto safety to regulation of drugs, cosmetics and chemicals, trade negotiators are taking aim at rules that hinder trans-Atlantic commerce. Economists believe that getting rid of them will produce the deal's biggest benefits, since trans-Atlantic tariffs are already low.

But doing so will require major regulatory agencies on both sides of the Atlantic, pushed by trade negotiators, to change bureaucratic procedures that have taken years to develop.

"It puts the regulators in a context that they're essentially unfamiliar with," said Peter Chase, vice president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's European program.

The drug inspections are supposed to assure domestic regulators that pharmaceutical imports are made in plants that meet international standards. When the U.S. and the EU started talks on a sweeping international trade deal last year, the drug industry argued the two regions could simply accept each other's inspections with no threat to public health.

"We see a lot of duplication of resources, as a high level of domestic inspections in the EU member states coincide with a high level of foreign inspections," the European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations, which represents industry giants such asMerck(Links to an external site.)

& Co. andPfizer(Links to an external site.)

Inc., said in a statement.

The EU is ready to accept U.S. inspections, officials say. The bloc already has similar pacts with Japan, Australia and several other developed nations. A deal would free up resources to inspect plants in the developing world that are subject to weaker regulation. "It allows us to go to China and India, where the problems are," said an EU official.

But the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has concerns about European drug inspections. Accepting the EU inspections would mean that audits done by the U.K. and Germany are equivalent to those by Eastern European nations such as Bulgaria and Romania, where concerns about mismanagement, regulatory resources and corruption linger. At a time when the FDA is under fire for allowing substandard medicine made in India and China into the U.S., the agency wants to assure itself that inspections across the EU are rigorous, a U.S. official said.

The U.S. Trade Representative's office didn't immediately comment on the regulatory concerns.

The EU argues that inspectors across the bloc follow EU-wide and international rules, and there has been little public concern in the EU about the issue. Pharmaceuticals shipped within the EU move freely across national borders. Implementing the inspection rules, though, is the responsibility of each member state. "Depending on the available resources, some of the inspectorates in the EU countries are more active than others," the Efpia said.

The FDA last week announced that it would examine how it could cooperate more with overseas drug regulators. But it is unclear whether that effort will result in the U.S. accepting EU inspections.

"We have increasing numbers of products coming from abroad," said Howard Sklamberg, the deputy FDA commissioner for global affairs. "In order to do our job of overseeing that, we have to work much more closely with foreign regulatory partners."

"This is an effort to determine how we can deepen our mutual reliance," Mr. Sklamberg added, "in what ways and how quickly."

Per the article, what is the biggest trade barrier believed by many economist.

Group of answer choices

Quotas

Regulation

Tariffs