According to Becker's theory of crime, minimizing a social loss function will imply that p (probability of conviction) and extent of punishment) should be chosen in the range such that 5,332,; (criminals should be more responsive to a 1% increase in p than to a 1% increase in f). Now, (a) Is this ever possible with a \"low p, high t\" strategy? Discuss at least 3 situations in which a low p, high f strategy might be compatible with criminals being more responsive to p than to f. gig; briey (non-mathematically) discuss the cost implications of this strategy for society. (10) (b) Recall Lee and McCrary's paper studying the odds of getting arrested before and after one's 181h birthday. An assumption made in the paper was that only the punishment changes when an individual turns 18. Now, assume that a, the income from legitimate sector activity, also goes up as soon as an individual turns 18. For example, this could be due to laws mandating that an adult be paid a higher salary than a juvenile. How will this affect the authors1 identication strategy and the conclusions they could draw? Explain