F581/ F582 Economics June 2013

Reply 720

Tahooper

17

What's likely to come up on Friday guys?

Reply 721

shaggyk

5

To those who are doing the F581 (unit 1) economics test on friday, any idea of what questions are expected to come up, and what the 18 marker might possibly be on?

Reply 722

nick123456789

Original post by LampardLegend

Yeah apologies, I meant 2592, hand slipped

hey guys

for question 4a) i got a totally different answer, which i do believe is right, i might be wrong however haha, hear me out:

In the case study they said something like GDP accounted for 35% in 2011, and investments was 40%.. surely that means youre not simply getting the GDP value and multiplying it by 0.40..?

Because 35% represented GDP, that means 6480Million dollars = 35%
Therefore you find 1% of that 6480 / 35 ... = 185.142...

Then to find the 45% you would times the answer by 45
= 8331.42...

I know its not a round number like what you guys got for simply multiplying by 0.4, but this is how interpreted the question :/

I do also remember reading in the case study investment value was greater than GDP, so it does seem somewhat legit haha. If anyone can get their hands on the case study, or accurately recall what the case study said would be awesome.

Anyway someone please tell me they did this aswell, 'cause speaking to the rest of my econ friends they all did what you did.
This is just my opinion, don't hate :biggrin:

cheers.

Reply 723

Tahooper

17

Original post by nick123456789

hey guys

for question 4a) i got a totally different answer, which i do believe is right, i might be wrong however haha, hear me out:

In the case study they said something like GDP accounted for 35% in 2011, and investments was 40%.. surely that means youre not simply getting the GDP value and multiplying it by 0.40..?

Because 35% represented GDP, that means 6480Million dollars = 35%
Therefore you find 1% of that 6480 / 35 ... = 185.142...

Then to find the 45% you would times the answer by 45
= 8331.42...

I know its not a round number like what you guys got for simply multiplying by 0.4, but this is how interpreted the question :/

I do also remember reading in the case study investment value was greater than GDP, so it does seem somewhat legit haha. If anyone can get their hands on the case study, or accurately recall what the case study said would be awesome.

Anyway someone please tell me they did this aswell, 'cause speaking to the rest of my econ friends they all did what you did.
This is just my opinion, don't hate :biggrin:

cheers.

I remember multiplying something by 0.4 but I came out with an exact number.

Reply 724

Robbie242

Original post by nick123456789

hey guys

for question 4a) i got a totally different answer, which i do believe is right, i might be wrong however haha, hear me out:

In the case study they said something like GDP accounted for 35% in 2011, and investments was 40%.. surely that means youre not simply getting the GDP value and multiplying it by 0.40..?

Because 35% represented GDP, that means 6480Million dollars = 35%
Therefore you find 1% of that 6480 / 35 ... = 185.142...

Then to find the 45% you would times the answer by 45
= 8331.42...

I know its not a round number like what you guys got for simply multiplying by 0.4, but this is how interpreted the question :/

I do also remember reading in the case study investment value was greater than GDP, so it does seem somewhat legit haha. If anyone can get their hands on the case study, or accurately recall what the case study said would be awesome.

Anyway someone please tell me they did this aswell, 'cause speaking to the rest of my econ friends they all did what you did.
This is just my opinion, don't hate :biggrin:

cheers.

You multiply the total real GDP by the percentage of investment, and you get a nice round number. 2572 or something like that.

Reply 725

charliewilson

Original post by nick123456789

hey guys

for question 4a) i got a totally different answer, which i do believe is right, i might be wrong however haha, hear me out:

In the case study they said something like GDP accounted for 35% in 2011, and investments was 40%.. surely that means youre not simply getting the GDP value and multiplying it by 0.40..?

Because 35% represented GDP, that means 6480Million dollars = 35%
Therefore you find 1% of that 6480 / 35 ... = 185.142...

Then to find the 45% you would times the answer by 45
= 8331.42...

I know its not a round number like what you guys got for simply multiplying by 0.4, but this is how interpreted the question :/

I do also remember reading in the case study investment value was greater than GDP, so it does seem somewhat legit haha. If anyone can get their hands on the case study, or accurately recall what the case study said would be awesome.

Anyway someone please tell me they did this aswell, 'cause speaking to the rest of my econ friends they all did what you did.
This is just my opinion, don't hate :biggrin:

cheers.

No, I don't think so as it gave the total real GDP figure for China and Japan... not the figure of counsumer expenditure...

Reply 726

nick123456789

Oh ok, so i either misread the question, or was trying to be too smart -.-.

thanks guys

Reply 727

tom_elsey

1

the fact is, results day is on my birthday, if I don't get an A I think I might cry in the exam hall! :frown:

Reply 728

CTArsenal

8

Original post by shaggyk

Ahh great thanks! are you taking the unit 1 exam this Friday by the way?

yup

I also liked this paper, but most of my revision didn't come in handy since I was revising more the current account haha :tongue:

I did talk a little about what the exchange rate would do to it in the essay so I guess my revision wasn't in vain!

Reply 729

LampardLegend

Original post by nick123456789

hey guys

for question 4a) i got a totally different answer, which i do believe is right, i might be wrong however haha, hear me out:

In the case study they said something like GDP accounted for 35% in 2011, and investments was 40%.. surely that means youre not simply getting the GDP value and multiplying it by 0.40..?

Because 35% represented GDP, that means 6480Million dollars = 35%
Therefore you find 1% of that 6480 / 35 ... = 185.142...

Then to find the 45% you would times the answer by 45
= 8331.42...

I know its not a round number like what you guys got for simply multiplying by 0.4, but this is how interpreted the question :/

I do also remember reading in the case study investment value was greater than GDP, so it does seem somewhat legit haha. If anyone can get their hands on the case study, or accurately recall what the case study said would be awesome.

Anyway someone please tell me they did this aswell, 'cause speaking to the rest of my econ friends they all did what you did.
This is just my opinion, don't hate :biggrin:

cheers.

Um, it said chinas real GDP was 6480billion, and it said investment was 40 percent of chinas real GDP, so you times 6480 by 0.40 surely? I think you've over complicated it a bit ?

Reply 730

PrinceUpsb

14

Original post by LampardLegend

Um, it said chinas real GDP was 6480billion, and it said investment was 40 percent of chinas real GDP, so you times 6480 by 0.40 surely? I think you've over complicated it a bit ?

You are correct. It was a 2 marker AS economics question, they are only testing your knowledge that investment is a portion of GDP and you have to find the appropriate figures.

Reply 731

PrinceUpsb

14

Original post by tom_elsey

the fact is, results day is on my birthday, if I don't get an A I think I might cry in the exam hall! :frown:

Get the envelope and open them the next day. Or celebrate your birthday a day early! Don't want tears on your bday do we.

Reply 732

shaggyk

5

Original post by CTArsenal

yup

I also liked this paper, but most of my revision didn't come in handy since I was revising more the current account haha :tongue:

I did talk a little about what the exchange rate would do to it in the essay so I guess my revision wasn't in vain!

ooh ok, i didn't do the unit 2 exam this time, i did it in jan and got an A :tongue:

Reply 733

M.I.A

I have a feeling that the 18 marker will be on minimum/maximum prices on the alcohol issue. Something like 'Discuss whether the government should impose a minimum price on the production or consumption of alcohol'.

Reply 734

SoapInMyEyes

Nah, defo a chance of indirect taxation coming up. Such as "discuss the extent to which Indirect Taxation by the government is an effective solution to correct market failure arising from pollution."

Reply 735

username963570

OP

21

thank god for this exam - atleast these 18 markers i can do !!! desperately want it to be on subsidisation/taxation/regulations as they are NICEE to talk about hahaha

Reply 736

username963570

OP

21

Original post by M.I.A

I have a feeling that the 18 marker will be on minimum/maximum prices on the alcohol issue. Something like 'Discuss whether the government should impose a minimum price on the production or consumption of alcohol'.

what's the effect of imposing a minimum price ?! never even saw this in the textbook :/

Reply 737

M.I.A

Original post by Fas

what's the effect of imposing a minimum price ?! never even saw this in the textbook :/

It is another form of correcting market failure.

Reply 738

username963570

OP

21

Original post by M.I.A

It is another form of correcting market failure.

is it in the OCR textbook ? almost certain i have never seen this... i understand it imposes a minimum price on products but how does that correct market failure ?