I hope econs today was not that bad. It was quite interesting but i think hard.
yes it was interesting, derped out on the sales tax question though, totally forgot about PED
I think a more argumentative paper.
Ah sales tax was similar to past year questions though terms of trade was interesting. Also people who were not careful.
But then my whole school almost everyone was complaining hard
If I dont quote much from extract, will they penalise heavily? E.g I use some of my own background info to evaluate that Japan was more problematic as it's issues were more chronic such as ageing population and shrinking labour force.
ya i think using background info is fine
Originally posted by DaLibrary:ya i think using background info is fine
not really. the purpose of case study is for you to analyze the case, not to write an essay based on your own knowledge.
I believe some marks are in fact allocated for writing to context (by quoting the case extracts)
However, own personal information can be counted for evaluation marks.
There were actually many possible reasons from the case why Japan was worst.
1). Central bank dont want to do anything now
2). Even if tightening labour policy increase income, if your workers are unemployed... no income to talk about in the first place
sales tax is ad valorem on consumers right ?_? i drew this weird ad valorem demand curve shift and got terribly confused by my weird diagram. i did use elasticity to explain though, thank goodness. on hindsight realized that the ad valorem factor is very probably a minor point markers won't care about. ._.;; btw, will we be penalized if we defined it as "fixed tax on producers" (my friend) though?
terms of trade was like ????????????? whaddis surprise T_T
i think background knowledge is great for substantiation but i don't think it's acceptable as a point in your essay itself as fire explained.
sigh never did well for econs CSQ as i never have time :( couldn't finish 2d (wrote 1m worth probably, but i did 2e before 2d) or write syntheses so that's like a straightup 15m gone. excuse me while i go emo in the dusty corner of my room, eating chocolates with mushrooms growing out of my head. T_T jk, got P2 on friday.
what do yall think are the likely topics for essays? :o
You guys all take 4H2s? Wow! How they calculate the total A level score? rebased to 90?
As in I soley use contextual knowledge for evaluation ah, but I didnt directly quote the extract. More like i wrote my points inferring and addressing the issues mentioned, no time to slowly copy paste ( if only can ctrl c ) the points in extract. So was wondering if will kena penalized for little quoting D: I think essay confirm market failure testing on the PMC PMB rational decision making and firms competetition, macro strong feeling about free trade ( intuition only )
Originally posted by theophilus:As in I soley use contextual knowledge for evaluation ah, but I didnt directly quote the extract. More like i wrote my points inferring and addressing the issues mentioned, no time to slowly copy paste ( if only can ctrl c ) the points in extract. So was wondering if will kena penalized for little quoting D: I think essay confirm market failure testing on the PMC PMB rational decision making and firms competetition, macro strong feeling about free trade ( intuition only )
i think if your points were based on the ones in the essays, e.g. deflation => recession spiral is more damanging and used japan's current deflation leading to several economic struggles which eventually may result in recession to substantiate, then it's great! but if your points are based on background knowledge e.g. quicker ageing population resulting in shrinking labour force restricting economic growth it won't be as good, but definitely not wrong either no worries. like L2 max i think bc L3 requires reference to extract + real world context.
yeah i've heard predictions about FTA/globalization, for micro at least 1 market failure/structure cfm. i think macro will probably test the 4 goals, maybe SoL?
Haha, the trick in a levels is to always give them balanced arguments. Balanced arguments already propels you to a L2. Alittle bit more to L3.
Perhaps they might just ask "How should the government intervene when we have people eating chocolates with mushrooms growing out of my head"
Trade has featured, so it wont appear. Market failure, market structure, ddss, and macro should feature.
I suggest.
1). DDSS
2). Market failure
3). Macro Policy
Its not a matter about whether you drew a table or not, but rather how you explained yourself.
I would say it is much easier to argue that Japan's inflation is more damaging and persistent.
1). Brazil is experiencing demand pull and cost push inflation, together with signs of economic growth-when incomes of people rises, it helps to offset the effects of inflation eroding the value of money, whereas for Japan, it is encountering low inflation, which means people's incomes are stagnating, yet inflation is further eroding their monies
2). If you read the news, Japan's central bank has already hit rock bottom in terms of reducing interest rates (liquidity trap), recently going into negative interest rate territory, that means Japanese banks pay people to borrow to consume, which results in a lack of liquidity for banks and they go bust. Brazil, meanwhile has much more leeway in terms of monetary policy.
3). Brazil's problems can be easily tackled. For example, its inflation was mainly also caused by excessive government spending on transfer payments. When incomes of Brazilians increase, they automatically pay more taxes, government welfare payments automatically reduce, which therefore acts to dampen demand pull inflation, also with economic growth, cyclical unemployment will reduce, therefore government doesnt have to pump in as much monies to reduce unemployment (which is also a cause of inflation stated)
4). As for Japan, the government also decided to implement a sales tax, which will negate any interest rate measure since it further deters people from spending, therefore in the long run likely to be persistent.
5). Brazil's monetary policy has also not kicked in yet.
6). I think for Japan, it was mentioned clearly in the extract that with the low inflation, there was a production drop. I believe the low inflation rate will not help to increase production because the low production was caused by the sales tax. Unless you remove the sales tax, then production will improve.
7). The focus of the last question should also be on comparison. If your entire essay is on how damaging high inflation is or how damaging low inflation is, i am sure it is not acceptable. Both countries are facing issues with their inflationary problems, we should zero in and talk about which country is likely to be more affected by their inflation based on their action plans and type of inflation.
CA question would require an opportunity cost explanation coupled with factor endowment, with major antithesises being India's protectionism, transport costs, increasing opportunity costs of production.
Originally posted by ArJoe:But you have to argue for both sides anyway… it is a discuss question
Many of my friends actually argued brazil, mainly because their inflation have led to lower economic growth indirectly, less capital accumulation etc.. it has also led to highercyclical unemployment, which is made worse by the higher labour costs, raising cost of production and shifting lras. It is like stagflation, very difficult to implement a policy to resolve all at onceJapan mild inflation is necessary to further encourage consumer spending…
i mainly talked about the subsidies leading to lower cop etc, lower opportunity costs of production… and of course the limitations. I would think variety is an important reason, lack of economic diversification, think it is mentioned in the extract
depends on how you argue. though i would take the safe side and follow how the extract phrases it. Anyway P2 is more important
Originally posted by ArJoe:Hey for the theory of ca i just realised i didnt really talk about factor endowments, but about india govt subsidy which allow them to produce agricultural products at relativrly lower cost of production, hence lower opp cost in producing.. will i be penalised?i wrote the limitations of ca in detail for anti thesis
all the best for paper 2 tmr!
lol i think factor endowment is probably the only thing they are looking for since Comparative advantages is always linked to factor endowment.
Based on your argument, i can subsidise cars/trucks/anything, not necessarily need to subsidize the agricultural products. But for India. because of their factor endowment whether got subsidiy or no subsidy also cannot produce capital intensive things based on extract.
all the best and choose question wisely