[vivek999]

Did anyonee did question 1 for unit 5A.. The German and Frech car industry one..I thought it wos very difficult...Anyone have any thoughts on that??

[yusufu]

(Original post by vivek999)
Did anyonee did question 1 for unit 5A.. The German and Frech car industry one..I thought it wos very difficult...Anyone have any thoughts on that??

From what I read of it, Question 1 seemed much harder than Question 2 (which I did). Pretty much everyone at my school did Question 2.

[Alex_18]

(Original post by danharris828)
Also mentioned above was the question about profit, output and price. It is fall fall fall. This is because AR shifts left, which creates a new MR curve (hence the lower output). This means that new MC=MR is confined by the new AR curve which is below the original ARleading to lower price. the only way i can get to the answer of a price rise is by drawing in a steeply downward sloping mc curve, which by the theory is incorrect

I got it wrong cause i wrote falling falling and risng price b'c instead of stifting the curvesa i think i changed the elasticities. damn! Does Anyoen know if the papers are gonna be up on the net tomorrow?

[RC.]

For the ageing popoluation question (question 2) in Economics unit 5A for the 3 causes of ineqiality and poverty amongst 65+ year olds, i wrote down as the three causes:

1) They are likely to be unemployed so not earning wages
2) when they are in work they are likely to be on low wages becasuse of discrimination and ageism
3) Net immigration so elder workers may not be attractive for employers

Does that seem ok?

Thanks

[yusufu]

(Original post by RC.)
For the ageing popoluation question (question 2) in Economics unit 5A for the 3 causes of ineqiality and poverty amongst 65+ year olds, i wrote down as the three causes:

1) They are likely to be unemployed so not earning wages
2) when they are in work they are likely to be on low wages becasuse of discrimination and ageism
3) Net immigration so elder workers may not be attractive for employers

Does that seem ok?

Thanks

For that question, I wrote that they have to pay for care and this will reduce any assets they may have, secondly they might not have any assets saved up and I wrote another reason which I can't remember at the moment.

[spursrule]

(Original post by YYYY)
For that question, I wrote that they have to pay for care and this will reduce any assets they may have, secondly they might not have any assets saved up and I wrote another reason which I can't remember at the moment.

I did: -

1) differences in accumulated wealth - eg. property, inheritance, shares, other assets

2) wage differentials - therefore differences in income during working lives

3) increased necessity to spend on private healthcare - causes poverty

To be honest, i think anything sensible and justified will get marks, economics is rather good like that when it comes to marking....he says

[RC.]

So does my causes seem alright then?

[RC.]

also for the 3 polciies used to redistribute household income, is regional policy a valid answer? For evaluation i said it may delay structural change. Is that right?

[M2DN]

For the very few tht did Question one in Unit 5a GO HERE

http://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/show...68#post4989768

[law-chic]

econ 5 b question 2 was okayyy. i dint like that last question about sub-saharan africa...i completely forgot to mention AIDS..oops
debt forgiveness was easy and aid question was alright too. question c was a bit tricky though. hopefully it dint go too bad. only the last question which was 20 marks! argh

[Forza_Milan]

(Original post by .jen.)
yeah for the ships i did some funny maths thing and worked it out in some mad way. so i got economies of scale.

i also said to achieve the target profit in the cost plus thing.

economies of scale is definately correct.

[Forza_Milan]

(Original post by V1000)
Isn't AC where the monopolies cost is set? So the cost should have remained contant?

The cost is where the price level where MR=MC output meets AC Curve.

[Cyclop]

there was a question about cost-plus pricing, what was the purpose for CPP anyway?

i was stuck on the first multiple choice for ages coz i couldn't come up with a proper explanation, is it "economies of increased dimensions"?

[I-am-so-boned]

(Original post by danharris828)
yeah the merger was decined due to barriers to entry increasing. All the others didnt seem relevant. larger firm means that they may be able to invest larger amounts in capital which to a potential firmt means higer sunk costs.

The industries were nationalised Natural Monopolys, not competitive markets. Surely the EU commission would be worried about costs increasing due to diseconomies of scale?

[moomoo2k]

yea but the question said stopping it in France - energy could come from other countries, for example
also, if there were going to be diseconomies of scale the firms wouldnt want to merge anyway

[tanusha-tomsk]

(Original post by danharris828)
Also mentioned above was the question about profit, output and price. It is fall fall fall. This is because AR shifts left, which creates a new MR curve (hence the lower output). This means that new MC=MR is confined by the new AR curve which is below the original ARleading to lower price. the only way i can get to the answer of a price rise is by drawing in a steeply downward sloping mc curve, which by the theory is incorrect

Why wouldn't it be inelastic? I'm sure most monopolies have an inelastic D curve? If it is a bit more inelastic than elastic, it's fall fall price rise. If it is just that bit more elastic, it is fall fall fall.

[danharris828]

i can understand what you are saying, but when i say "steeply downward sloping", i am not talking about the demand (AR) or MR because that is the perfectly feasable in a monopoly. What i am talking about is a steep negatively sloping MC curve. I can draw the curve with inelastic ARs and still come up with fall fall fall.

To get the answer "fall fall rise" with the usual positive MC, the AR would have to shift left a small amount, and go from being relativly elastic to being relatively inelastic. No change in elasticity was mentioned.

I would be interested in the diagram u used in the answer to explain a fall fall rise. However to clear this up we would need geoff riley to comment or something, im just going by texbook methods.

[sul]

(Original post by spursrule)
I did: -

1) differences in accumulated wealth - eg. property, inheritance, shares, other assets

2) wage differentials - therefore differences in income during working lives

3) increased necessity to spend on private healthcare - causes poverty

To be honest, i think anything sensible and justified will get marks, economics is rather good like that when it comes to marking....he says

i did that question, almost the same asnwers as well:
1) inheritance of assets----------> could be used to provide income via renting out property etc = inequality and people with no welath live in RELATIVE poverty.
2) attatchment to the labour market: during working lives some people may have suffered from unemployment and therefore would have had a low propensity to save, so they have less savings now and are in relative poverty. EVALUATION: hyperinflation during 1970's may have meant even people who earned wages would've spent their money so savings is not that much of an important factor.
3)spending on healthcare and i used an example where this old man/woman had to sell their home to pay for their operations, coz they had savings of >7000 quid. hence my 3rd point was Government Policies.

overall i think i whooped that papers ****. i can chill out on unit 6 now, bring it on!

[yusufu]

(Original post by g_sachs)
i did that question, almost the same asnwers as well:
1) inheritance of assets----------> could be used to provide income via renting out property etc = inequality and people with no welath live in RELATIVE poverty.
2) attatchment to the labour market: during working lives some people may have suffered from unemployment and therefore would have had a low propensity to save, so they have less savings now and are in relative poverty. EVALUATION: hyperinflation during 1970's may have meant even people who earned wages would've spent their money so savings is not that much of an important factor.
3)spending on healthcare and i used an example where this old man/woman had to sell their home to pay for their operations, coz they had savings of >7000 quid. hence my 3rd point was Government Policies.

overall i think i whooped that papers ****. i can chill out on unit 6 now, bring it on!

Everything you wrote is wrong. That's not what the question asked for.

[sul]

(Original post by YYYY)
Everything you wrote is wrong. That's not what the question asked for.

mind telling me what DID the question ask for ?