25. The Scandal of Phone Call Price Gouging by Prisons
In most states, the phone company guarantees the prison a commission of a
percentage on every call. The average commission is 42% of the cost of the
call, but in some states it is 60%. So 60% of what families pay to receive a
collect call from their imprisoned relative has nothing to do with the cost of
the phone service. Also, the phone company that o#ers the highest
commission is often the company to get the prison contract.
Source: The Guardian, May 23, 2012
a. Who is practicing price gouging: the prison, the phone company, or both?
Explain.
Although the phone company alone appears to be price gouging, both the phone
company and the prison are price gouging. The phone company is gouging
b. Evaluate the “fairness” of the prison’s commission.
According to the “rules” view of fairness, the commission is fair because the
Economics in the News
26. After you have studied Reading Between the Lines on pp. 120–121, answer
the following questions.
a. What is the method used to allocate highway space in the United States and
what is the method used in Singapore?
b. Who bene%ts from the U.S. method of highway resource allocation? Explain
your answer using the ideas of marginal social bene%t, marginal social cost,
consumer surplus, and producer surplus.
In the United States, roads are allocated using %rst-come, %rst-served. This
allocation is ine.cient and so deadweight loss is created. Drivers with a low
valuation of time (that is, a low marginal bene%t) gain consumer surplus and
c. Who bene%ts from the Singaporean method of highway resource allocation?
Explain your answer using the ideas of marginal social bene%t, marginal
social cost, consumer surplus, and producer surplus.
In Singapore, roads are allocated using market price. Drivers who have marginal
bene%t that exceeds the price will drive and will gain consumer surplus. Producers