Help me to reply to four people.

Person 1:

If US manufacturers produce less output, there will be less need for independent trucking companies to transport goods. In the short run, the trucking companies will need to compete with the other companies to land the newly limited clients. As a result, they will need to lower their rates to win clients over from their fellow companies in the same business. The market price will decrease as many companies will have to become price takers and utilize lower prices to keep business going since their firm does not have market power. An individual firm will yield less profit due do lower prices, and the market equilibrium quantity of trucks needed to transport goods will decrease as the products needed to be transported is less than before. An increase in the output from American companies would create more demand from trucking companies, allowing them to increase their prices again to rebound from the previous scenario. In the long run, this will allow success of both the trucking companies and the production.

Person 2:

Demand for independent trucking will decline if US manufacturers produce less output. In the short run, market price in the independent trucking will decline due to reduced demand causing the output of an individual firm to also decline. Equilibrium quantity will also decline in the independent trucking market in the short-run.

The demand for independent trucking depends on the US manufacturers output. A decline in manufacturing reduces demand, price and equilibrium quantity in the independent trucking market. In the short run, a reduction in demand results in negative economic profits and may cause firms to exit the market in the long run.

If the output in the US manufacturing marketing increases, then in the long-run firms in the independent trucking market will earn normal profit because the increased output will result in increased demand. This will cause the price in the independent trucking market to increase and will result in them earning economic profit.

In a perfectly competitive market, economic profit will attract new firms in the industry. As new firms enter the market, the market price falls resulting in reduced profits and slowing entry in the long run. New firms will continue to enter if they are making an economic profit. The supply curve will shift to the right and will drive the price down in the long run to the original price. As a result, economic profits will return to zero in long run equilibrium.

Person 3:

Perfect competition is a market structure where there are many small firms, none of which are large enough to influence the price of a good or service. Examples of perfect competition include the local farmers market, where multiple farmers sell similar products, and online retail stores, like Amazon, where there are many sellers of a wide variety of products. On the other hand, a monopoly is a market structure where there is only one firm producing a good or service and it can set the price of the good or service without competition. Examples of monopolies include utilities such as electricity, water, and gas, as well as cable and internet providers, which are often monopolies in certain areas. A monopoly is less socially efficient than the perfect competition because it typically results in higher prices and fewer choices for consumers. In a monopoly, the firm has no incentive to be efficient, since it is not competing with any other firms. This leads to a decrease in social welfare since consumers have to pay more for the same service or product. Although monopoly is less socially desirable, the government allows it to exist because it can provide certain benefits. Monopolies can provide economies of scale, which leads to lower costs for consumers and can also provide stability and predictability in the market. Additionally, some monopolies are natural monopolies, meaning that it is not feasible for two or more firms to offer the same good or service in the same area.

Person 4:

The key attributes of perfect competition consist ofhaving a variety of firms, identical products among sellers, and they can easily exit/enter the industry. In a monopolistic market, there is only one seller and many buyers. Because it only consists of one seller, the firm can set their own price for theproducts with the intentions of maximizing their profits. An example of perfect competition that I experienced recently was going down the cereal aisle at a grocery store. There were so many of the same types of cereal being offered, but different brands. Although some were cheaper than others, they were pretty much all the same. Another experience I had was on the internet. After trying to find a new pair of white tennis shoes, I realized that so many companies offered either the same or identical pair of shoes. Each one was priced a few dollars higher or lower than each other, but it was ultimately the same. A monopoly that I heard of lately was railways. If I wanted to make my own railway, I simply couldn't do it because it is a government owned industry. But, because prices are so cheap, I can easily purchase a ticket. Another example that I use all the time is Google. If I ever have a question or I need to search something up, Google is my first resort. It turns out that Google owns at least 70% of market share. Monopoly is less efficient then perfect competition because it sets higher pricers for their goods and are less innovative over time. The government allows some monopolies to exist in order to ultimately keep costs down (economies of scale). Because of mass production, products can be produced at a lower cost than from perfect competition. Therefore, it would be cheaper and more reliable for the consumer.