If Jane can produce 3 pairs of shoes hourly, while Bob can produce 2, then one can infer that the __________ advantage belongs to __________. � A. absolute; Jane� B. comparative; Jane� C. comparative; Bob� D. comparative and absolute; Jane

I think it's D but I don't get how Jane would have a comparative advantage

To determine which party has a comparative advantage, we need to compare their opportunity costs. The opportunity cost of an action is the value of the next best alternative that is given up in order to choose that action. In this case, Jane's opportunity cost is the number of pairs of shoes she could produce if she were to allocate her time to something else other than producing shoes. Similarly, Bob's opportunity cost is the number of pairs of shoes he could produce if he were to allocate his time to something else other than producing shoes.

To calculate opportunity cost, we divide the quantity of the alternative product by the quantity of the given product. In this case, the alternative product is pairs of shoes, and the given product is the other task that each person could be doing instead.

Jane's opportunity cost is the number of pairs of shoes she could produce if she were to allocate her time to another task. Since Jane can produce 3 pairs of shoes per hour, her opportunity cost of producing shoes is 1/3 pairs of shoes per hour.

Bob's opportunity cost is the number of pairs of shoes he could produce if he were to allocate his time to another task. Since Bob can produce 2 pairs of shoes per hour, his opportunity cost of producing shoes is 1/2 pairs of shoes per hour.

Comparing the opportunity costs, we can see that Jane's opportunity cost of producing shoes is lower (1/3 pairs of shoes per hour) compared to Bob's opportunity cost (1/2 pairs of shoes per hour). Thus, Jane has a lower opportunity cost of producing shoes and hence a comparative advantage in producing shoes.

Therefore, the correct answer is C. comparative; Bob