While comparing and contrasting these key attributes of perfect competition and monopolies,
price equals marginal cost and firms earn an economic profit of zero. In a monopoly, the price is
set above marginal cost and the firm earns a positive economic profit. Perfect
competition produces an equilibrium in which the price and quantity of a good is economically
efficient.

You brought out the similarities and differences between perfect competition and
monopoly market structures. For instance, you mentioned that in a monopoly market, prices are
set slightly above the marginal cost, and this helps a firm to earn a positive economic profit.
However, a perfect competition market structure results in equilibrium as the price and quantity
of a good is economically efficient. Additionally, you provided an example for each type of
market structure as required by the instructions. For a perfect competition market, you gave an
example of agricultural markets where farmers are selling identical products to the market, and
in a monopoly market, you gave an example of public services like railways. I agree with your
argument that the government encourages monopolies to achieve economies of scale, which
eventually benefits consumers.

Perfect competition and monopolies

You gave a unique definition of perfect competition market and said that it is made of
multiple parties in the same area of business and have the same opportunity. You noted that
monopolies are the complete opposite of perfect competition market structure. I also love your
definition of a monopoly market. To you, a monopoly, the company can decide what they want
the quantity and market price to be. Additionally, you state that customers can be taken
advantage of when there is an urgency of the need to purchase monopolies products. The
example you gave of a monopoly as required by the instructions is Edison, which supply the
electricity in South California. APA style