D2.Eco.8.9-12: Intended and Unintended Consequences of Government Policies
In plain English: D2.Eco.8.9-12 is the C3 Framework economics indicator for grades 9-12 that asks students to describe the possible consequences, both intended and unintended, of government policies meant to improve market outcomes. Students trace how buyers and sellers respond to a policy and separate the effects lawmakers aimed for from the ones they did not.
Describe the possible consequences, both intended and unintended, of government policies to improve market outcomes.
C3 Framework for Social Studies (NCSS) · Dimension 2: Applying Disciplinary Concepts and Tools · Discipline: Economics · Exchange and Markets · Official standard
D2.Eco.8.9-12 asks students to describe the possible consequences of government policies meant to improve market outcomes, both intended and unintended. Intended consequences are the results lawmakers aimed for. Unintended consequences are the other results, which can be harmful or helpful, and which usually come from the ways buyers, sellers and workers change their behavior in response to a policy. Describing consequences well means tracing those responses step by step, asking who is affected beyond the group the policy targets, and checking the evidence before deciding which results the policy caused.
Students read Frédéric Bastiat's 1850 essay on what is "seen" and "not seen" in economic policy (Source 1) and the goals and tools of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933 (Source 2). They then analyze real U.S. Census Bureau data on cotton acreage and prices (Source 3) and on tenant farmers and sharecroppers in the South (Source 4), and finish with an invented fishery case in which a policy reached its goal and also produced results nobody planned (Source 5).
Learning Objectives
By the end of this lesson, students will be able to:
Identify the intended consequences of a policy from its stated goals and tools
Predict unintended consequences by tracing how buyers, sellers and other groups respond to a policy
Use historical data to describe a policy's consequences, while distinguishing evidence of change from proof of cause
Explain Bastiat's distinction between effects that are seen and effects that are not seen, and judge its limits
Describe the possible consequences of a proposed policy change, including new unintended ones
Prior Knowledge Required
Students should already be comfortable with:
Explaining reasons for a government role when markets are inefficient D2.Eco.6.9-12
Evaluating public policies by their intended and unintended outcomes D2.Civ.13.9-12
"A school wants students to drink less soda, so it raises the price of soda in its vending machines from $1.50 to $3.00. List everything that might happen, not only what the school wants."
Collect a long list on the board. Students usually include fewer sodas sold (the goal), but also students bringing soda from home, a store across the street selling more, more juice or sports drinks sold, and more money for the school from the sodas still sold. Sort the list into two columns, intended and unintended, and mark each unintended result as helpful or harmful. Tell students that D2.Eco.8.9-12 asks them to describe both columns for government policies meant to improve markets.
Direct Instruction20 minutes
Key terms for D2.Eco.8.9-12 (working definitions)
Term
Meaning
Example
Intended consequence
A result the policy's authors aimed for
A tax on cigarettes leads fewer teens to smoke
Unintended consequence
A result the authors did not aim for; it can help or harm
The same tax leads some people to buy cigarettes across a state line
Behavioral response
A change in what people do because a policy changed their incentives
Drivers buy smaller cars when gas taxes rise
Price floor
A legal minimum price, set above the market price
A minimum price for milk paid to dairy farmers
Price ceiling
A legal maximum price, set below the market price
A cap on what a stadium may charge for parking
Surplus and shortage
More offered than bought at the legal price, or more wanted than offered
Unsold milk under a floor; empty shelves under a ceiling
Part 1: Where unintended consequences come from. A policy changes prices, costs or rules, and people respond to those changes in every way open to them, not only in the way the policy's authors expected. To predict consequences, ask three questions: Who is directly targeted, and how will they respond? Who else is affected (buyers, sellers, workers, taxpayers, people in other places)? What happens over time, after people have had a chance to adjust?
Part 2: From prediction to evidence. After a policy takes effect, data can show what changed. But other events happen at the same time, so a careful description separates what the evidence shows (a fact) from why it happened (an interpretation that needs support). Unintended consequences can also be good: a policy aimed at one goal sometimes helps with another.
A price floor (invented)
Without a policy, milk sells for $3.00 a gallon and buyers purchase 100 million gallons a year. To raise dairy farmers' incomes, the government sets a minimum price of $3.50 and promises to buy any milk that is not sold. At $3.50, buyers purchase 90 million gallons and farmers produce 110 million. Describe the consequences.
Result: Intended: farmers receive $3.50 x 110 million = $385 million instead of $300 million. Unintended: a surplus of 110 - 90 = 20 million gallons, which the government buys for 20 million x $3.50 = $70 million of taxpayers' money; buyers pay more and drink 10 million fewer gallons; the stored surplus must be dried, given away or wasted.
What is seen and what is not seen (invented)
A state gives a company $12 million in tax breaks to build a plant that will employ 400 people. A news story says the state "created 400 jobs." What is seen, and what is not seen?
Result: Seen: 400 jobs at the plant, or $12,000,000 / 400 = $30,000 of tax breaks per job. Not seen: the $12 million the state does not collect must be made up by other taxpayers or by spending less on roads, schools or other services, which affects other jobs; rival firms that did not get the break compete at a disadvantage. The full description includes both sides.
An unintended consequence can help (invented)
A city cuts bus fares to reduce traffic. Daily ridership rises from 20,000 to 24,000. Shops near the busiest stops report more customers, but buses at rush hour are now crowded. Sort the consequences.
Result: Intended: ridership rises by 4,000 a day, or 4,000 / 20,000 = 20%, and some drivers leave their cars at home. Unintended and helpful: more customers for shops near stops. Unintended and harmful: crowded rush-hour buses and a larger subsidy from the city budget, since each rider pays less.
People respond in more than one way (invented)
A town starts charging $2 for each bag of household trash. In the first year, trash collected falls from 1,000 to 780 tons a month and recycling rises from 200 to 330 tons a month. The town also finds about 25 tons a month of trash dumped illegally, which costs $400 a ton to clean up. Describe the consequences.
Result: Intended: 1,000 - 780 = 220 fewer tons of trash a month, and 330 - 200 = 130 more tons recycled. Unintended: 25 x $400 = $10,000 a month of cleanup for dumped trash. Some of the drop in collected trash is dumping, not real reduction, so the policy's success is smaller than the first number suggests.
Teacher tip. Students often list only harmful unintended consequences, or call every bad result "unintended." Some harmful results are predicted and accepted as costs. Ask, "Did the authors aim for this, expect it, or not foresee it?" and "Is it helpful or harmful, and for whom?"
Guided Practice15-20 minutes
An economist's warning. Context note: Frédéric Bastiat (1801-1850) was a French economist and member of the National Assembly who argued for free trade and limited government. Economists of many views still use his idea of the "seen" and the "not seen." Critics point out that he wrote to persuade, and that his claim about what "almost always happens" is a strong generalization, not a measured result. Present Source 1 as one author's argument, to be tested rather than accepted. Read it aloud. Glossary: "department of economy" (the field of economics), "manifests itself" (shows itself), "ultimate consequences" (final results), "fatal" (here, disastrous), "the destination given by the State to the millions voted" (what the government spends the money on), "device" (a motto engraved on a coin).
1In the department of economy, an act, a habit, an institution, a law, gives birth not only to an effect, but to a series of effects. Of these effects, the first only is immediate; it manifests itself simultaneously with its cause--it is seen. The others unfold in succession--they are not seen: it is well for us if they are foreseen. Between a good and a bad economist this constitutes the whole difference--the one takes account of the visible effect; the other takes account both of the effects which are seen and also of those which it is necessary to foresee. Now this difference is enormous, for it almost always happens that when the immediate consequence is favourable, the ultimate consequences are fatal, and the converse. Hence it follows that the bad economist pursues a small present good, which will be followed by a great evil to come, while the true economist pursues a great good to come, at the risk of a small present evil.
[...]
2The State opens a road, builds a palace, straightens a street, cuts a canal, and so gives work to certain workmen--this is what is seen: but it deprives certain other workmen of work--and this is what is not seen.
[...]
3Study the question, now, in both its elements. While you state the destination given by the State to the millions voted, do not neglect to state also the destination which the tax-payer would have given, but cannot now give, to the same. Then you will understand that a public enterprise is a coin with two sides. Upon one is engraved a labourer at work, with this device, that which is seen; on the other is a labourer out of work, with the device, that which is not seen.
Frédéric Bastiat, That Which Is Seen, and That Which Is Not Seen (Source 1: introduction and section V, Public Works) (1850; this edition 1874). Public domain (published 1874). Source text.
Seen and not seen today. Prompt: apply paragraph 2 to the tax-break example in Direct Instruction. Which workers are "seen," and which are "not seen"? Teacher note: plant workers are seen; workers whose jobs depend on spending that taxpayers or the state would otherwise have done are not seen.
Test the claim. Pairs discuss: is it true that "when the immediate consequence is favourable, the ultimate consequences are fatal"? Find one example from Direct Instruction that fits the claim and one that does not. Collect a few answers without settling the question.
A policy to raise farm prices. Context note: By 1932, during the Great Depression, prices for crops had fallen so far that many farmers could not pay their debts. In May 1933 Congress passed the Agricultural Adjustment Act. It paid farmers to grow less, hoping that smaller harvests would raise prices, and paid for the program with a tax on processors such as cotton mills. Because the 1933 cotton crop was already planted, farmers were paid that summer to plow part of it under. In 1936, in United States v. Butler, the Supreme Court ruled that the Act's processing tax and the crop-reduction payments it funded were unconstitutional, and Congress passed new farm laws in 1936 and 1938. Glossary: "commodities" (farm products such as cotton, wheat and hogs), "purchasing power" (how much a farmer's crop can buy of other goods), "base period" (the years used for comparison), "consumptive demand" (how much people want to buy and use), "rental or benefit payments" (payments from the government under the program).
1SEC. 2. It is hereby declared to be the policy of Congress— (1) To establish and maintain such balance between the production and consumption of agricultural commodities, and such marketing conditions therefor, as will reestablish prices to farmers at a level that will give agricultural commodities a purchasing power with respect to articles that farmers buy, equivalent to the purchasing power of agricultural commodities in the base period. The base period in the case of all agricultural commodities except tobacco shall be the prewar period, August 1909–July 1914. In the case of tobacco, the base period shall be the postwar period, August 1919–July 1929. (2) To approach such equality of purchasing power by gradual correction of the present inequalities therein at as rapid a rate as is deemed feasible in view of the current consumptive demand in domestic and foreign markets. (3) To protect the consumers' interest by readjusting farm production at such level as will not increase the percentage of the consumers' retail expenditures for agricultural commodities, or products derived therefrom, which is returned to the farmer, above the percentage which was returned to the farmer in the prewar period, August 1909–July 1914.
[...]
2SEC. 8. In order to effecuate the declared policy, the Secretary of Agriculture shall have power— (1) To provide for reduction in the acreage or reduction in the production for market, or both, of any basic agricultural commodity, through agreements with producers or by other voluntary methods, and to provide for rental or benefit payments in connection therewith or upon that part of the production of any basic agricultural commodity required for domestic consumption, in such amounts as the Secretary deems fair and reasonable, to be paid out of any moneys available for such payments. [...]
Seventy-third Congress of the United States, Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933, sections 2 and 8 (Source 2: the goals and tools of the policy) (1933). US government work (17 U.S.C. 105). Source text.
Goal and tool. Prompt: in one sentence each, state the Act's goal in paragraph 1 and its main tool in paragraph 2. Discuss the sentences as a class; the quiz returns to both.
Predict before the data. Prompt: if the government pays landowners to plant fewer acres, how might each of these groups respond: landowners, tenant farmers who rent land, sharecroppers (farmers who pay the landowner with a share of the crop), cotton mills, shoppers? Students write predictions to check against Sources 3 and 4.
Independent Practice15-20 minutes
What the data show. Sources 3 and 4 are real data from the U.S. Census Bureau's Historical Statistics of the United States (1975), a US government work.
Source 3: U.S. cotton, 1929-1937 (U.S. Census Bureau, Historical Statistics of the United States, series K 553-555, real data)
Year
Acres harvested (thousands)
Production (thousands of bales)
Price received (cents per pound)
1929
43,232
14,825
16.78
1930
42,444
13,932
9.46
1931
38,704
17,097
5.66
1932
35,891
13,003
6.52
1933
29,383
13,047
10.17
1934
26,866
9,636
12.36
1935
27,509
10,638
11.09
1936
29,755
12,399
12.36
1937
33,623
18,946
8.41
Source 4: Farms run by tenants in the South, 1930 and 1940 (U.S. Census Bureau, Historical Statistics of the United States, series K 128-141, real data)
Operators
1930
1940
All tenants (including croppers)
1,790,783
1,449,293
Croppers (sharecroppers) only
776,278
541,291
White tenants
1,091,944
942,655
White croppers
383,381
242,173
Black and other tenants
698,839
506,638
Black and other croppers
392,897
299,118
Real data. Source 3 uses U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates (a bale is about 500 pounds). Source 4 uses the 1930 and 1940 censuses of agriculture; croppers are counted as part of all tenants, and the Census label "Negro and other" appears here as "Black and other."
Students answer on their own: (1) Compare your predictions with Sources 3 and 4. Which came true in the data? (2) Which changes look like intended consequences, and which look unintended? (3) Name two other events of the 1930s that could also explain some of these changes. Quiz questions 8-14 and 19 use Sources 3 and 4.
Closure15-20 minutes
A modern pattern. Introduce Source 5, an invented scenario based on a pattern seen in several real fisheries, for the quiz and homework.
1Invented scenario, written for this page. It follows a pattern that has occurred in several real fisheries, but Gray Bay and its numbers are fictional.
2For decades, about 300 boats fished for rockfish in Gray Bay with no limit on how much they could catch. Each boat had a reason to catch as much as it could before others did, and by 2010 the number of adult rockfish had fallen to about half of what it had been in 1990.
3In 2010 the state set a total catch limit of 6 million pounds of rockfish a year for the whole fleet. Once the fleet reached the limit, the season would close. By 2020 the number of adult rockfish was back near its 1990 level.
4Other changes followed. Boats raced to catch as much as possible before the limit was reached, and the season shrank from 200 days in 2011 to 6 days in 2020. Crews fished in storms rather than lose a day, and Coast Guard rescues in the bay rose from about 2 a year to 11. Because nearly the whole catch now came in during one week, processors froze most of it, and the price boats received fell from $2.40 a pound for fresh fish to $1.50 a pound. Many owners bought bigger, faster boats to win the race, although the total catch could not rise above 6 million pounds.
SVHS (invented scenario written for this page), The Race for Rockfish in Gray Bay (Source 5: invented scenario). Original passage written for this page.
Exit ticket: Name one intended and one unintended consequence of the Gray Bay catch limit, and explain the behavioral response that caused the unintended one.
Teacher note on the sources and history: Sources 1 and 2 are quoted exactly; Source 2 is transcribed from the Statutes at Large page images. Sources 3 and 4 are copied from the Census Bureau's Historical Statistics tables. The 1930s facts in the context note are well documented. How much of the drop in Southern tenants and sharecroppers was caused by the Act is an interpretation that historians debate: many argue that landowners who were paid to plant less often kept the payments and let tenants go, and in 1934 tenant farmers in Arkansas organized the Southern Tenant Farmers' Union to protest evictions; others give more weight to tractors, the Depression itself and later migration to cities. Bastiat argued for limited government; the lesson presents his idea as a tool and asks students to test it. Source 5 and all worked examples are invented. Rubrics score the description of consequences and the use of evidence, not a position on any policy.
Differentiation Strategies
For Struggling Students
Give a two-by-two organizer: intended or unintended, and helpful or harmful, with one example filled in
Provide a percent-change frame: "(new - old) / old x 100" with Source 3's 1932 values filled in
Pair each Source 2 paragraph with a one-sentence plain-language version
For Advanced Students
Research the 1933 plow-up of cotton already planted and explain how paying farmers to destroy part of a crop affected farmers, consumers and public opinion
Research United States v. Butler (1936) and explain how the Court's decision changed the policy and its consequences
Find one other real policy with a well-documented unintended consequence and describe the behavioral response behind it
Assessment Guidance
What to Look For
Strong answers name the policy's goal from its text, trace specific behavioral responses to describe unintended consequences, include effects on groups beyond the target (taxpayers, tenants, consumers, people in other places), mark consequences as helpful or harmful, and separate what the data show from claims about cause. Watch for students who list only harmful effects, who treat every change after a policy as caused by it, or who accept or reject Bastiat's generalization without testing it.
02
Classroom Activities
3 Activities
1
Consequence Web
20 minGroups of 4
Each group draws a web for one invented policy card: the policy in the center, the intended consequence on one branch, and at least four other branches for buyers, sellers, workers and taxpayers or people elsewhere. Each branch is labeled intended or unintended and helpful or harmful. Groups then trade cards with another group and add one consequence the first group missed.
The 4 Policy Cards (invented)
A state pays a one-time $2,000 bonus to teachers who take jobs in rural school districts.
A country pays farmers a fixed amount for every bushel of corn they grow.
A city requires every new restaurant to provide 20 parking spaces.
A state gives a $1,000 rebate to anyone who buys a new, more efficient furnace.
Sample Answers for the Teacher
Card 1: intended, more rural teaching jobs filled; unintended, some bonuses go to teachers who would have taken the jobs anyway, some teachers leave once they have the bonus, nearby districts without the bonus find it harder to hire (harmful), the bonuses cost taxpayers, and rural towns gain new residents who shop locally (helpful).
Card 2: intended, higher farm incomes; unintended, more corn than buyers want, lower market prices, land shifted away from other crops, cost to taxpayers.
Card 3: intended, less street parking pressure; unintended, fewer new restaurants on small lots, higher costs passed to diners, more paved land.
Card 4: intended, lower energy use; unintended, some rebates go to people who would have bought anyway, furnace sellers raise prices, installers gain business (helpful).
Accept other consequences that students explain with a behavioral response.
Discussion Questions
Which unintended consequence on your web would be hardest to measure? Why?
Which consequence would a supporter of the policy call a cost worth paying?
2
Seen and Not Seen
15 minPairs
Using Bastiat's idea in Source 1, pairs complete a two-column chart, "seen" and "not seen," for three invented cases. Then each pair writes one sentence explaining whether the not-seen column changes their view of the policy, and one sentence on a consequence that Bastiat's method might miss.
The 3 Cases (invented)
A county spends $2 million to repave a road that already works well, saying it will employ 40 road workers for a year.
A city buys 50 electric buses, paid for with a new sales tax.
A state stops charging tolls on a bridge and pays its upkeep from the general budget.
Sample Answers for the Teacher
Case 1: seen, 40 road jobs and a smoother road; not seen, $2 million that taxpayers or the county cannot spend elsewhere, which would also have supported jobs, and repairs on worse roads that are delayed.
Case 2: seen, new buses and cleaner, quieter streets; not seen, purchases shoppers skip because of the tax, and other uses of the money.
Case 3: seen, free crossings and shorter lines at toll booths; not seen, people who never cross the bridge now share its cost, and more traffic on the bridge.
Something Bastiat's method can miss: benefits that are spread out and hard to see, such as cleaner air, can also be "not seen"; the method works in both directions.
Modification for English Learners
Provide picture icons for "seen" (an eye) and "not seen" (a closed eye), and the frame "We can see ___, but we cannot easily see ___."
3
Gray Bay Council
20-25 minGroups of 4, then red-team pairs of groups
Each group is an advisory council for the invented Gray Bay fishery in Source 5. It chooses one change to the catch-limit policy, describes its intended consequences, and writes a one-paragraph proposal. Then two groups swap proposals and act as a "red team": each lists at least two unintended consequences the other group's proposal might cause. Groups revise their proposals once.
Policy Options to Choose From
Give each boat its own share of the 6-million-pound limit, which it may catch at any time in the year.
Keep the fleet-wide limit but set a small limit for each boat on each trip.
Pay some owners to retire their boats, so fewer boats share the limit.
Close the fishery on days with storm warnings.
Sample Red-Team Points for the Teacher
Boat shares: boats can fish slowly and sell fresh fish, but the first owners receive a valuable right for free, and if shares can be sold they may end up with a few large owners.
Trip limits: the season lengthens, but boats may throw back smaller fish to fill each trip with larger ones.
Buyback: fewer boats and crews, but the payment costs taxpayers and remaining boats may still race.
Storm closures: safer crews, but boats race even harder on calm days.
Scoring Note
Score the quality of the predicted consequences and the revision, not the option chosen. Every option can earn full credit.
03
Diagrams & Visual Aids
2 diagrams
Diagram 1: Cotton Acres and Prices Before and After the 1933 Act (Real Census Data)
Bars drawn to scale; the darker bars mark 1933, the year the Agricultural Adjustment Act passed. Data: U.S. Census Bureau, Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970 (1975), series K 553 (acreage harvested) and K 555 (price per pound), U.S. Department of Agriculture figures.
Diagram 2: Tenant Farmers and Sharecroppers in the South, 1930 and 1940 (Real Census Data)
Bars drawn to scale, in thousands of farms run by each kind of operator in the South. Data: U.S. Census Bureau, Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970 (1975), series K 128-141, from the 1930 and 1940 censuses of agriculture. The Census table counts sharecroppers (croppers) as a part of all tenants and uses the label "Negro and other"; this page writes "Black and other."
04
Homework Assignment
~30 min
D2.Eco.8.9-12 Homework: Intended and Unintended Consequences
Directions: Part 1 uses new invented cases. Part 2 uses Sources 1-5 in the lesson plan. Label each consequence intended or unintended and helpful or harmful, and show every calculation.
Part 1: New Cases (Problems 1-3)
Invented example: eggs sell for $2.10 a dozen in a free market. The government sets a minimum price of $2.50 a dozen and promises to buy any eggs that are not sold. At $2.50, buyers purchase 40 million dozen a year and farmers produce 52 million dozen. Find the surplus and the government's cost of buying it, and describe two intended and two unintended consequences.
Invented example: a city spends $5 million on a new sports arena, and the mayor says it will "create 150 jobs." Use Bastiat's idea of the seen and the not seen to describe the consequences. Then name one benefit of the arena that might also be "not seen."
Invented example: a water district gives a $50 rebate to every household that installs a low-flow showerhead. Sort these possible results into intended or unintended, and helpful or harmful: (a) water use per shower falls; (b) some people take longer showers because each minute uses less water; (c) many rebates go to households that were going to buy the showerheads anyway; (d) local plumbers get more work; (e) the district's water bills fall, so it collects less money for pipe repairs.
Part 2: Using the Sources (Problems 4-6)
Source 3: compute cotton yield per acre (thousands of bales divided by thousands of acres) for 1932 and 1933, and the percent change. Production barely changed even though acres harvested fell. Suggest a behavioral response by farmers that could explain this, and explain whether it is an intended or unintended consequence of a policy that paid farmers to plant fewer acres.
Source 4: compute the percent change from 1930 to 1940 in all Southern tenants and in Southern croppers. Write one sentence that states only what the data show, and one sentence that offers an interpretation of why. Name one piece of evidence that would help test your interpretation.
Write a one-page description of the intended and unintended consequences of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, using Sources 1-4. Include at least one intended consequence the data support, one unintended consequence for a group outside the policy's target, one other possible cause of the changes, and one sentence on how Bastiat's idea applies. Then, in a final paragraph, apply the same method to Source 5.
Rubric
Criterion
Full Credit (2 pts)
Partial Credit (1 pt)
No Credit (0 pts)
Calculations
Surplus, cost, yields and percent changes correct in Problems 1, 4 and 5
One or two errors
Calculations missing or set up incorrectly
Intended and Unintended
Correctly labels both kinds, helpful and harmful, with the behavioral response behind each
Labels without explanations
Kinds confused
Evidence and Cause
Separates what data show from interpretations and names other possible causes
Some separation
Treats every change as caused by the policy
Use of Sources
Accurate use of Sources 1-5 in Problems 4-6
Sources used loosely
Sources not used
05
Quiz: 20 Questions
Interactive, with answers
Instructions
Questions 1-3 use Source 1 and questions 4-7 use Source 2, both in Guided Practice. Questions 8-11 use Source 3 and questions 12-14 and 19 use Source 4, both in Independent Practice. Questions 15, 16 and 18 use Source 5 in Closure. Question 17 uses Sources 1-4, and question 20 is a new invented case. Your score updates as you answer, and Reset quiz clears everything.
Multiple choice: pick an option to check it. Short answer: write your answer, then reveal the model answer.
0 of 20 answered · 0 correct
Question 1 of 20 · Multiple Choice
According to Source 1, paragraph 1, what separates a good economist from a bad one?
Answer: B
Bastiat writes that the bad economist "takes account of the visible effect," while the good one "takes account both of the effects which are seen and also of those which it is necessary to foresee." Choice D reverses this. Choice C goes beyond the paragraph, which is about how to judge effects, not about opposing every law. Choice A is not in the source.
Question 2 of 20 · Multiple Choice
In Source 1, paragraph 3, what does Bastiat say a reader must state, besides what the State does with the money it spends?
Answer: A
He writes: "do not neglect to state also the destination which the tax-payer would have given, but cannot now give, to the same." That unspent private money is the "not seen" side of the coin. Choice B is the seen side. Choices C and D are not in the paragraph.
Question 3 of 20 · Multiple Choice
According to Source 1, paragraph 1, what does the bad economist pursue?
Answer: A
Bastiat writes that "the bad economist pursues a small present good, which will be followed by a great evil to come." Choice C is what he says the true economist pursues. Choices B and D are not in the source.
Question 4 of 20 · Multiple Choice
According to Source 2, paragraph 1, what was the Act's main goal for farm prices?
Answer: C
Section 2(1) aims to "reestablish prices to farmers at a level that will give agricultural commodities a purchasing power with respect to articles that farmers buy, equivalent to" the base period, August 1909-July 1914 for most crops. Choice A contradicts the goal of higher farm prices. Choice B is not in the source. Choice D picks the wrong year: 1932 prices were the problem.
Question 5 of 20 · Multiple Choice
According to Source 2, paragraph 2, how were reductions in acreage or production to be arranged?
Answer: A
Section 8(1) provides for reductions "through agreements with producers or by other voluntary methods," with "rental or benefit payments" to those who took part. Choices B, C and D describe compulsory methods that the section does not use.
Question 6 of 20 · Multiple Choice
What does Source 2, paragraph 1, part (3) promise consumers?
Answer: B
Part (3) protects consumers by not increasing "the percentage of the consumers' retail expenditures for agricultural commodities ... which is returned to the farmer, above the percentage which was returned to the farmer in the prewar period." It limits the farmer's share, not the price itself. Choice A confuses the share with the price. Choices C and D are not in the section.
Question 7 of 20 · Multiple Choice
According to Source 2, which base period applies to tobacco?
Answer: D
The Act says, "In the case of tobacco, the base period shall be the postwar period, August 1919-July 1929." Choice A is the base period for all other crops. Choices B and C are not in the source.
Question 8 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Use Source 3. By about what percent did cotton acres harvested fall from 1932 to 1934?
Answer: B
(35,891 - 26,866) / 35,891 = 9,025 / 35,891, about 25%. Choice A divides the drop by the 1934 figure instead of the 1932 figure. Choice C measures from 1929 instead of 1932. Choice D treats the drop of about 9.0 million acres (9,025 thousand) as if it were a percent.
Question 9 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Use Source 3. By about what percent did the price farmers received for cotton rise from 1932 to 1934?
Answer: D
(12.36 - 6.52) / 6.52 = 5.84 / 6.52, about 90%. Choice A measures from 1931 instead of 1932. Choice B divides the rise by the 1934 price. Choice C treats the rise of 5.84 cents as if it were a percent.
Question 10 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Which pattern in Source 3 best matches the intended consequence described in Source 2?
Answer: A
The Act aimed to raise farm prices by reducing production, and after 1933 acres harvested fell well below 1932 while the price rose sharply. Choice C describes the problem before the Act. Choices B and D describe later changes that worked against the goal, not the change the Act aimed for.
Question 11 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Use Source 3. In 1937, acres harvested rose to 33,623 thousand and the price fell to 8.41 cents a pound. Which explanation fits the data best?
Answer: B
Production in 1937 was 18,946 thousand bales, the largest in the table, and a much larger supply pushes the price down. Choice A has no support in the table. Choice C contradicts the record production. Choice D is not supported.
Question 12 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Use Source 4. By how many did the number of croppers (sharecroppers) in the South fall from 1930 to 1940?
Answer: C
776,278 - 541,291 = 234,987. Choice A is the drop in all tenants (1,790,783 - 1,449,293). Choice B is the drop in Black and other croppers only. Choice D adds the two years instead of subtracting.
Question 13 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Use Source 4. Which statement about Southern tenants from 1930 to 1940 is accurate?
Answer: C
Black and other tenants: (698,839 - 506,638) / 698,839, about 28%. White tenants: (1,091,944 - 942,655) / 1,091,944, about 14%. Choice A reverses the comparison. Choice B is false: both fell. Choice D gives one shared rate, but the two rates differ.
Question 14 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Use Source 4. Which group of Southern croppers fell by the larger percent from 1930 to 1940?
Answer: D
White croppers: (383,381 - 242,173) / 383,381, about 37%. Black and other croppers: (392,897 - 299,118) / 392,897, about 24%. Choice A gives the correct rate for Black and other croppers but the wrong conclusion. Choice B is false: the drops were 141,208 and 93,779. Choice C attaches the white croppers' rate to the other group.
Question 15 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Which result in Source 5 was an intended consequence of the Gray Bay catch limit?
Answer: D
The limit was set to stop overfishing, and "By 2020 the number of adult rockfish was back near its 1990 level." Choices A, B and C are unintended consequences of the race to catch fish before the limit was reached.
Question 16 of 20 · Multiple Choice
Use Source 5. With a catch of 6 million pounds, how much less did Gray Bay boats receive for the year's catch at $1.50 a pound than they would have at $2.40?
Answer: C
6 million x ($2.40 - $1.50) = 6 million x $0.90 = $5.4 million. Choice A is the total received at $1.50. Choice B is the price difference per pound read as millions. Choice D is the total at $2.40.
Question 17 of 20 · Short Answer
Use Bastiat's idea of what is seen and what is not seen (Source 1) to describe the consequences of the Agricultural Adjustment Act (Sources 2-4) for two groups other than the landowners who received payments.
Model answer: What was seen was higher cotton prices and payments to landowners, which helped many farm owners pay their debts. What was less easily seen were the effects on others. Tenant farmers and sharecroppers depended on land to work, and many historians argue that when landowners were paid to plant fewer acres, many tenants lost their places; Source 4 shows far fewer Southern tenants and croppers in 1940 than in 1930, though historians debate how much of that drop the Act caused, since tractors and the Depression also played a part. Shoppers and cotton mills paid more, since the Act paid for itself with a tax on processors and aimed to raise prices. A full description counts these groups alongside the landowners. Rubric: 1 point for the seen consequence; 1 point for each of two not-seen consequences for named groups, with evidence; 1 point for linking to Bastiat's idea.
Question 18 of 20 · Short Answer
Describe two unintended consequences of the Gray Bay catch limit and the behavioral response behind each. Then propose one change to the policy that is not one of the four options in Activity 3, and predict one unintended consequence of your change.
Model answer: Because the season closed when the fleet reached the limit, each boat raced to catch fish first. That race shortened the season and pushed crews to fish in storms, so rescues rose; it also put most of the catch on the market in one week, so processors froze it and the price fell. I would divide the yearly limit into twelve monthly limits, so fish reach the market all year and can be sold fresh. One possible unintended consequence is that boats would still race at the start of each month, so some crews might keep fishing in bad weather on opening days. Rubric: 1 point for each unintended consequence with its behavioral response; 1 point for a fitting policy change; 1 point for a plausible new unintended consequence.
Question 19 of 20 · Short Answer
A student writes: "Source 4 proves that the Agricultural Adjustment Act forced hundreds of thousands of tenants off the land." Explain what the data do show, what they do not show, and what other evidence would help.
Model answer: The data show that the number of Southern farms run by tenants, and by croppers in particular, fell sharply between the 1930 and 1940 censuses. They do not show why: the counts come from only two years and could also reflect tractors replacing workers, the Depression itself, farms being combined, or people moving to cities. Evidence that would help includes records of evictions after 1933, landowners' and tenants' accounts, data for the years in between, and comparisons with crops or regions that were less affected by the Act. The claim may be partly right, but "proves" is too strong. Rubric: 1 point for what the data show; 1 point for what they do not show, with another possible cause; 1 point for useful additional evidence.
Question 20 of 20 · Short Answer
Invented example: after a hurricane, the government of a fictional island makes it illegal to sell bread for more than its price before the storm. Describe the possible intended and unintended consequences, and mark each unintended one as helpful or harmful.
Model answer: Intended: families can still afford bread, and sellers cannot charge very high prices when people are desperate. Unintended: at the low price, buyers want more bread than bakers offer, so shelves empty quickly and people wait in long lines (harmful); bakers and shippers from other islands have less reason to bring in extra bread or flour (harmful); some bread is sold secretly above the cap (harmful); people who reach the store first may buy more than they need (harmful); fairness concerns are eased, which some residents value (helpful). Rubric: 1 point for an intended consequence; 1 point for each of two unintended consequences explained by a behavioral response; 1 point for marking them helpful or harmful.
0 of 20 answered · 0 correct
06
Frequently Asked Questions
10 Questions
What does D2.Eco.8.9-12 mean?
D2.Eco.8.9-12 asks high school students to describe what can happen when the government acts to improve a market, including results nobody planned. The full text is "Describe the possible consequences, both intended and unintended, of government policies to improve market outcomes." It belongs to the Exchange and Markets part of the C3 Framework's economics indicators for grades 9-12.
What is an unintended consequence in economics?
An unintended consequence is a result of a policy that its authors did not aim for. It usually comes from people changing their behavior in response to new prices, costs or rules. Unintended consequences can be harmful, such as a shortage, or helpful, such as a side benefit nobody expected.
Are unintended consequences always bad?
No. Some are helpful: a policy aimed at one problem can ease another. Good descriptions mark each unintended consequence as helpful or harmful and say for whom, because the same result can help one group and hurt another.
How do students predict unintended consequences?
By tracing behavioral responses step by step. Ask who the policy targets and how they will respond, who else is affected, and what happens after people have time to adjust. The activities on this page practice that method on invented cases before students apply it to history.
Why does the lesson use the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933?
It is a well-documented case in which a policy had clear goals written into the law, real data to check its results, and debated effects on groups outside its target. The lesson quotes the Act from the Statutes at Large and uses Census Bureau tables, so students can test claims against evidence.
Is Bastiat's "seen and not seen" idea biased?
Bastiat argued for free trade and limited government, and he wrote to persuade. His method, looking for effects that are less visible, is used by economists of many views, and it works in both directions: hidden benefits can be "not seen" too. The lesson asks students to test his strong claim rather than accept it.
How is D2.Eco.8.9-12 different from D2.Eco.7.9-12?
D2.Eco.8.9-12 is about describing a policy's consequences, intended and unintended. D2.Eco.7.9-12 is about weighing a policy's benefits and costs to judge how effective it is. A good evaluation depends on a full list of consequences, so the two are often taught together.
How does D2.Eco.8.9-12 connect to civics?
The civics indicator D2.Civ.13.9-12 asks students to evaluate public policies by their intended and unintended outcomes. The economics indicator focuses on policies aimed at markets and on the behavioral responses of buyers and sellers, so the two support each other in government and economics courses.
Does this lesson take a side on farm policy or regulation?
No. The 1933 Act is presented with its goals, its supporters' aims and the debated evidence about its effects, and the fishery case is invented. Rubrics score the description of consequences and the use of evidence, not a position on any policy.
What is a quick check for D2.Eco.8.9-12?
Describe a short invented policy and ask students for one intended consequence, two unintended ones with the behavioral response behind each, and one piece of evidence they would collect to check. Answers that name specific groups and responses show the indicator's reasoning.
07
Related Standards
5 standards
These standards connect to D2.Eco.8.9-12: prerequisites to review first, parallel standards at the same level, and next steps that build on it.
Before this lesson
D2.Eco.8.6-8Prerequisite
Explain how external benefits and costs influence market outcomes
Analyze multiple and complex causes and effects of events in the past
Lesson coming soon
Standard text: National Council for the Social Studies (NCSS), The College, Career, and Civic Life (C3) Framework for Social Studies State Standards: Guidance for Enhancing the Rigor of K-12 Civics, Economics, Geography, and History (Silver Spring, MD: NCSS, 2013). NCSS was not involved in the production of this lesson and does not endorse it.
