The Student Room Group
Competition - post a photo you've taken of nature >>
Competition - post a photo you've taken of nature >>
Competition - post a photo you've taken of nature >>

AQA A2 Economics Unit 3 (ECON3) 20th June 2016 OFFICIAL THREAD

Scroll to see replies

Can someone please make a prediction for unit 4?
I did context 2 and in the 10 marker I defined equity and equality and then talked only about wage discrimination...is it still possible to get maximum marks? I wrote a whole side on wage discrimination
Hmmm... has anyone here chosen the equality and equity section?

Please tell me equity was the positive statement testable as a fact with the use of the GINI, and equality the normative statement depending on people's opinions and political persuasion..... I think I already know the answer to that but meh.

Would a lot of marks be lost because of such a mix up?
Original post by Ghost12345
I did context 2 and in the 10 marker I defined equity and equality and then talked only about wage discrimination...is it still possible to get maximum marks? I wrote a whole side on wage discrimination


As long as you have a long enough logic train of thought in the essay you should. Although I think you can be awarded only a maximum of 6 marks to one string of logic, hmm.... so if you have one graph and a couple definitions you really should be fine for a 10 marker.
For the essay 1, 15 marker which was ' explain with economic theory wy perfectly competitive markets are allocatively effcient' what did you all write
I did context 2 and in the 10 marker, I defined equity and equality but then only talked about wage discrimination- still possible to get max marks? I wrote a whole side on wage discrimination
For the 1st question in section 2, I did not talk about oligopolies at all, how badly will this impact my mark?
Original post by Ghost12345
I did context 2 and in the 10 marker, I defined equity and equality but then only talked about wage discrimination- still possible to get max marks? I wrote a whole side on wage discrimination


Could you say how you defined the two?
Original post by meimaths123
For the essay 1, 15 marker which was ' explain with economic theory wy perfectly competitive markets are allocatively effcient' what did you all write


SR - allocative efficient, prod inefficient
LR- allocative efficient, prod efficient, x, static

used the SR LR PC diagram for analysis

dynamically inefficient tho
Original post by NotoriousS
For the 1st question in section 2, I did not talk about oligopolies at all, how badly will this impact my mark?


Idk. If it makes you feel better I only did 6 lines on oligopoly as i ran out of time.
Original post by NotoriousS
For the 1st question in section 2, I did not talk about oligopolies at all, how badly will this impact my mark?


I didn't talk about oligopolies as well but I told my economics teacher about the other stuff that i wrote and she said it was good without mentioning oligopolies..
Original post by Caius Filimon
Could you say how you defined the two?


Equity is concerned with how resources are distributed throughout society and then I defined vertical + horizontal equity and equality is concerned with fairness and so is normative and then I talked about inequality and gave a cause of it
Original post by BirdIsWord
SR - allocative efficient, prod inefficient
LR- allocative efficient, prod efficient, x, static

used the SR LR PC diagram for analysis

dynamically inefficient tho


Do you think it was necessary to talk about the other types of efficiency even though it only talked about allocative efficiency? I didn't
Original post by Ghost12345
Equity is concerned with how resources are distributed throughout society and then I defined vertical + horizontal equity and equality is concerned with fairness and so is normative and then I talked about inequality and gave a cause of it


Thank you!

And thank goodness; I think I also said equality is normative.

Do you think it would be bad if I did not talk about the vertical/horizontal equity but instead say that equity is positive because it can be measured through the use of the GINI coefficient? :/ I mostly talked about distribution of income/wealth (used the two interchangeably, sadly). But meh, it was only a 10 marker... so if anything I lost 2 marks from the definitions. Surely one would still get one mark per definition for a good (but perhaps partially wrong) attempt.
Original post by Ghost12345
Do you think it was necessary to talk about the other types of efficiency even though it only talked about allocative efficiency? I didn't


Uhh you should have at least mentioned Productive and Allocative man
Original post by BirdIsWord
Uhh you should have at least mentioned Productive and Allocative man


If that was the perf compet question, do you think it was a bad idea to mention reasons as to why perf competition might not show how productive efficiency may be achieved? Due to the lack of supernormal profits and as such little chance for dynamic efficiency. Or economies of scale in terms of static efficiency due to small firm sizes.
Original post by Caius Filimon
If that was the perf compet question, do you think it was a bad idea to mention reasons as to why perf competition might not show how productive efficiency may be achieved? Due to the lack of supernormal profits and as such little chance for dynamic efficiency. Or economies of scale in terms of static efficiency due to small firm sizes.


The only time perfect competition is not productively efficient is in the short run..
Original post by BirdIsWord
The only time perfect competition is not productively efficient is in the short run..


Also in the long run in terms of dynamic efficiency because of reasons given before.
Original post by BirdIsWord
Uhh you should have at least mentioned Productive and Allocative man


That wasn't what the question was asking though
Original post by Ghost12345
That wasn't what the question was asking though


The question was asking why PC is seen as efficient.

Original post by Caius Filimon
Also in the long run in terms of dynamic efficiency because of reasons given before.


Yes, there is no dynamic efficiency in the long or short run.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you