This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

WJEC Economics EC6 - Fri 13th June

Hey everyone,
How many did this exam today? And what did everyone think of it? :smile:

I personally felt it went pretty well. I did questions 1, 3 and 4. To summarise, the questions were on the following topics:

1) Perfect Competitive
2) Negative externalities
3) "Is lowering taxes best to maximise economic growth?"
4) Trade-Offs between inflation and unemployment
5) International Trade
6) Developement

Reply 1

dewithomas

Oh much, much better than EC5!!

I did the externalities one, economic growth then the international trade. Last night I remembered that the EC5 was similar to the 2006 paper so I read this morning the EC6 2006 mark scheme and there were similar q's there.

The Econ growth and inter trade were great!
not sure the externalities was the best to do, WAS going to do the inflation and unemployment one but could only think about Philips Curve and Minimum Wage (inflation) and nout else!

But overall a good paper, hopefully it'll match the 116/120 I got in AS for EC3! Dont think so!
I also wrote 19 pages so quite alot I felt, especially as I've messy writing! oh well!
Felling better now though, gutted about EC5 still! :biggrin:

Reply 2

tristanperry

OP

Glad to hear it went well :smile:

The essay one is always a nice one IMO.

The international trade did seem nice, however I didn't have *loads* of time and felt I could do the inflation/unemployment one justice so I went for that one. As you say, talking about the Phillips curve etc is necessary. I also (as a sub-point) mentioned that a rise in AD would cause inflation, and a rise in employment (hence fall in unemployment) thus showing the trade-off as well.

Reply 3

Adam-Cardiff

1

I did Question 3, which was about Tax Cuts and Economic Growth, Question 4, which was about the Trade Off between inflation and Unemployment, and Question 5, which was whether removing barriers to trade will benefit UK citizens.

I thought it was probably quite a fair paper and no easier or harder than the other years.

Reply 4

tristanperry

OP

Adam-Cardiff

I did Question 3, which was about Tax Cuts and Economic Growth, Question 4, which was about the Trade Off between inflation and Unemployment, and Question 5, which was whether removing barriers to trade will benefit UK citizens.

I thought it was probably quite a fair paper and no easier or harder than the other years.

Those are some good questions :smile:

What did you write about in Qu 4?

It seemed a nice paper. Much easier than the 07 one (as that one was, IMHO, really hard) however it's about on par with the rest IMO :smile:

Reply 5

stunting101

hey . . . i did the same as tristian...1 3 and 4..thought they were the questions i could do the most justice on...

ii was surprised as i was almost certain i would decide to answer both trade ones however i felt that i could have been writing for ages if i did them lol...

what did everyone write for the cutting tax rates to maximis growth?

did everyone say yes...but...no... ? if u know what i mean..

and the unemployment one... i just wrote about keynesian policies and how they would lead to inlfation then contrasted with monetrists views and their supply side policies....and how they would lead tog rowth..decreased u/e and lower inflation at every level of e/e thus shifting the long run phillips curve to the left.

and for perfect comp? i just defined...gave the characteristics..said how only normal in the long run...and how they will maximis efficiency etc.. and compared to a monopoly
then said how they wouldnt in long run and not dynamically efficient as lack fund to re invest...not motiviated to r+d due to perfect knowledge...also homogenous good and how wont be able to gain economies of scale???

any thoughts are appreciated please ? :smile:

cheers

Reply 6

tristanperry

OP

stunting101

and the unemployment one... i just wrote about keynesian policies and how they would lead to inlfation then contrasted with monetrists views and their supply side policies....and how they would lead tog rowth..decreased u/e and lower inflation at every level of e/e thus shifting the long run phillips curve to the left.

Sounds a better answer than mine lol! :smile:

Although I think I covered most of that (maybe in a slightly different way, but still).

I also mentioned stagflation, and how this suggests the trade-off doesn't always exist (between u/e and inflation)

stunting101

and for perfect comp? i just defined...gave the characteristics..said how only normal in the long run...and how they will maximis efficiency etc.. and compared to a monopoly
then said how they wouldnt in long run and not dynamically efficient as lack fund to re invest...not motiviated to r+d due to perfect knowledge...also homogenous good and how wont be able to gain economies of scale???

Again, sounds a good answer!

Yep, I did the whole define, give diagram and characteristics (etc).

Then I sort of did a "Yes but No" thing as well. (Yes for reasons like they're obviously productively and allocatively efficient etc, and that a lot of competition would benefit the economy etc etc; No because they don't make supernormal profits, hence the Govt. wouldn't get much tax revenue to spend on improving the economy further, and that other structures can also be fairly efficient too etc)

Reply 7

stunting101

tristanperry

Sounds a better answer than mine lol! :smile:

Although I think I covered most of that (maybe in a slightly different way, but still).

I also mentioned stagflation, and how this suggests the trade-off doesn't always exist (between u/e and inflation)

Again, sounds a good answer!

Yep, I did the whole define, give diagram and characteristics (etc).

Then I sort of did a "Yes but No" thing as well. (Yes for reasons like they're obviously productively and allocatively efficient etc, and that a lot of competition would benefit the economy etc etc; No because they don't make supernormal profits, hence the Govt. wouldn't get much tax revenue to spend on improving the economy further, and that other structures can also be fairly efficient too etc)

ahh yehh cheers .. i didnt get time to mention the stag flation specifically and talk about the 1980's as a period of transition...but i felt i was tight for time so decided to get to the monetarists view..

you have any views on the cut taxes to reach growth question?? i wasnt completely sure about the answer.... :smile:

cheers

Reply 8

tristanperry

OP

Yep, you can never include everything :smile:

For the taxes question, I think I discussed (for the "Yes" bit) how lowering various taxes (income, corporation and one other, which I forget) will effect growth etc. I wrote quite a bit here, can't remember all too well though!

Reply 9

stunting101

ahh nice one..yeh i wasnt 100% sure but i wrote the same i think....... (will explain as not really sure if its was the right direction or not??)

i wrote how a cut in taxes on incomes would produce more disposable incomes and fueling increse in comnsumption and AD etc..then just drew it and explained how it would effect growth and national incomes and employment

then did how a cut in corporate taxes would make investment more profitbale in the long runa nd thus fueling increasing investment and leanding to an increase in both AD and AS and drew the increase in LRAS.

then talked how firms would raise supply aswell and its becomes more profitable to produce etc etc... but then said how it would likely lead to dmeand pull inflationa nd why inflation would be bad and could potentially disrupt any growth. i wroe quite abit on this bit as i felt i had a lot to say lol.... think i summed up with how a cut in taxes is mor eliekly to induce high levels of demand in the short run that raise supply as supply is unresponsive etc and is more of a longer term phenomenon....

then said instead governments should seek to improve the prod capacity of the economy through supply side poices and how these would be better than demand managment polces...but said how their costly and a long temr solution and it should therefore be a likely mix between the 2 for optimum growth. (think i talked about how increasing demand is actualy growth whereas raisng supply is potnetial growth..wasnt 100% sure on this point as had only read it that morning?!?! lol.

you doing economics at uni?

Reply 10

tristanperry

OP

Sounds some good things to say :smile:

Yeah, I mostly written along those lines - income and corporation taxes are the most obvious (and best) to discuss.

The points you make about SS-side policies being a long term solution seems good, and finding a mix is something I hadn't mentioned.

stunting101

you doing economics at uni?

I'll be doing maths, however with some econ. modules.

How about you?

Reply 11

stunting101

ahh yeh cheers. i wasnt pleased with ec5 ec4 tbh but i think the ec6 was alot easier and it hink it helped having all the past questions since 2000 lol (some one posted it on TSR)
cant be certain tho...

and yeh im doing economics bsc at birmingham :smile:

...in 2009 having a gap year lol.

nice one...yeh i have to say i find economics very interesting
although i have heard its ALOT harder at uni..oh well.