The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Edexcel Economics Unit 4 Global Economy Discussion Thread (10.June.2014)

Scroll to see replies

Original post by aminkaram
That's what most people have done, but I stupidly did it another way. i.e 4 other points and then evaluated by saying savings gap is more significant. Which would be a perfectly valid approach if I could think of more than 1 evaluation point. That being said it probably still wouldn't have helped me that much since I was short on time.


Which data response did you do ?? :smile:


Posted from TSR Mobile
Am I the only one who found that gini coefficient one hard?! what did everyone do?? I just distinguished between gini coefficient and relative poverty and said that relative poverty falls because living standards rise due to higher gdp but gini coefficient is rising because inequality will still remain and I said perhaps the benefits of growth don't go to the poor in the economy, then evaluated by saying things will change in long term as extract 1 said, then commented on hard to tell from given data etc
Original post by sheik96
I did question 1. A) I didn't particularly relate it to the UK or a specific country. I talked about an increase in corporation tax revenue, decrease in spending on unemployment benefits and Osborne's austerity cuts. Does not relating mean I won't get marks? My points were all theoretical not real-world...

B) I focused on the fact that it was an increase in income tax on high earners. So I talked about people moving abroad, decrease in disposable income etc. Did anyone else specifically relate it to high earners or did I do it wrong??


I wrote about exactly the same points as you, and yes it was high earners as it said the top rate on interest
Original post by xHuski
What did everyone write for Qu1 & 4? My brain just went dead when i went into the exam. And i feel like I didnt either 1. Make enough points or 2. the points weren't good enough...


I answered both of these:

Q1a) there wasn't much for eval, i just prioritised and could you say that government borrowing had fallen and more of the national debt had been paid off, thereby reducing the budget deficit?

For q4, i'm really not sure about (b) and (c)

for (b) i know that it was all KAA but i don't know if i got all the marks? it just said describe the increase in income inequality so i x-refd the data and drew a lorenz curve shifting out.

(c) was pretty horrible, could you say that absolute poverty may have increased (the poorest) thereby allowing relative poverty to rise but with an overall increase in inequality? Could you then say for eval that relative poverty is subjective, difficult to define, and more data is needed?

and for (d) was this basically primary product dependency pros/cons but related to economic effects?
Reply 924
Avatar for mxjc278
mxjc278
ok, I misunderstood 1a, and instead of defining budget deficit I put the definition of trade deficits.
I still made a load of applicable points, but I set out the question in the wrong way.

Would I be able to get at least 10/20 for that?

Also in the question about imbalances, was it right to talk about a current account deficit?

Panicking. Thanks!
Original post by mxjc278
ok, I misunderstood 1a, and instead of defining budget deficit I put the definition of trade deficits.
I still made a load of applicable points, but I set out the question in the wrong way.

Would I be able to get at least 10/20 for that?

Also in the question about imbalances, was it right to talk about a current account deficit?

Panicking. Thanks!


Was the question why countries want to reduce trade imbalances?


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by neji123
Am I the only one who found that gini coefficient one hard?! what did everyone do?? I just distinguished between gini coefficient and relative poverty and said that relative poverty falls because living standards rise due to higher gdp but gini coefficient is rising because inequality will still remain and I said perhaps the benefits of growth don't go to the poor in the economy, then evaluated by saying things will change in long term as extract 1 said, then commented on hard to tell from given data etc


Yeah i did pretty much similar. What i said was that relative poverty has declined but in fact, absolute poverty has probably risen and has produced the net resultant rise in inequality. I then evaluated by saying that relative poverty is a normative concept and subjective, and also more data is needed to compare with absolute poverty or confirm the trend. But what you said makes sense too, it was a really hard q
Reply 927
Avatar for TheHenri
TheHenri
OP
1
Original post by Farringtonn
Was the question why countries want to reduce trade imbalances?


Posted from TSR Mobile

thats how I interpreted it but it was wrong :/
Reply 928
Avatar for mxjc278
mxjc278
Original post by Farringtonn
Was the question why countries want to reduce trade imbalances?


Posted from TSR Mobile


Not 100% sure but I think it was. Just saw an earlier post here which threw me off.
Original post by TheHenri
thats how I interpreted it but it was wrong :/


What?! Oh no, are you sure? I'm pretty sure it said 'discuss why countries may want to reduce trade imbalances?


Posted from TSR Mobile
Current account imbalances sorry :smile:


Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 931
Avatar for combes
combes
Original post by sheik96
I did question 1. A) I didn't particularly relate it to the UK or a specific country. I talked about an increase in corporation tax revenue, decrease in spending on unemployment benefits and Osborne's austerity cuts. Does not relating mean I won't get marks? My points were all theoretical not real-world...

B) I focused on the fact that it was an increase in income tax on high earners. So I talked about people moving abroad, decrease in disposable income etc. Did anyone else specifically relate it to high earners or did I do it wrong??


I did exactly the same as you! I've been worried since, I have a feeling we may have done it wrong as Britain did not increase income tax since 2007, Does anyone else know if looking at the question theoretically will cost you a lot of marks?
Original post by Farringtonn
Which data response did you do ?? :smile:


Posted from TSR Mobile


I did question 4. Actually found most of it straightforward apart from part (c). I just gave a definition and some application. Didn't even bother with the rest of the question.
So am I basically the only person to think question 2 was pretty decent?
Someone please comment on my approach and give me peace of mind, maybe even an estimate mark if you're that kind:smile:

Part (a) talked about why terms of trade has increased between more countries since 1970s instead of just usa , the UK and another country I forgot.
- KAA:
1) reduction in transport costs , containerisation
2) andvancements of technology of communication I.e the internet
3) trade liberalisation
-Evaluation:
1) increased pollution bad for environment (even happy I remember tradeable pollution permits from unit 1 lol)
2) not all developing countries have ease of access to internet

Part (b) talked about the global effects from USA and UK giving high subsidies to their agricultural industries in 2012.
-KAA:
Intro) define subsidies
1) increase consumer surplus from rising supply and lower production costs (subsidy diagram).
2) increasing world population needs more food (slipped in a limit to growth point about developing nations with high fertility rate), therefore reducing absolute poverty in these countries.
3) economic dumping by USA and UK
4) no time, had to move to section 2 :bricks::bricks:

-Evaluation:
1) can't remember, but was a strong point for sure.
2) over farming damaging the soil
3) made some facts up about some african countries (Kenya) being influenced by the BRICs and thus are talking about undergoing import-substitution which will counter dumping.

I'm aware I needed a 4th point for the level 5 bracket but do I still make it to level 4 with 3 points and 3 evals??:confused:
Original post by teacher2014
Good evening students.

Unit 4 was considerably harder than Unit 3, due to a combination of question ambiguity and question complexity.

I would hasten to add that your Edexcel board had experienced examiner recruitment problems last year for unit 4; has the situation changed appreciably? Anyone's guess.

If what happened with Unit 4 last year repeats this year, I would urge you all to get a remark asap. Under no conditions should you allow a poorly constructed unit 4 in conjunction with the possibility of less experienced examiners threaten your future!


It costs too much for something that is not our fault.
Original post by combes
I did exactly the same as you! I've been worried since, I have a feeling we may have done it wrong as Britain did not increase income tax since 2007, Does anyone else know if looking at the question theoretically will cost you a lot of marks?


Not too sure. I did tax but did VAT which the UK increased from 17.5-20


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Farringtonn
What?! Oh no, are you sure? I'm pretty sure it said 'discuss why countries may want to reduce trade imbalances?


Posted from TSR Mobile

The question was why the countries shown in Figure 4 reduced their current account imbalances, so you're looking at causes.
Original post by Kutie Karen
It all costs money that we can't afford and the hassle involved as well. I was well stressed last year as I should not have been cheated out of my grade and messed everything up for me. Isn't there anything anyone with clout can do ?


Agree totally
Original post by Kutie Karen
Shortage of experienced examiners for economics.


I don't think it is sorted out for this year either
For data response question 4 would these points be valid?

part d: 1. Prebisch Singer hypothesis However it hasn't held up in the real world. i.e primary products more expensive than manufacturing
2. Commodity shocks could worsen the balance of trade and stifle growth However these shocks could just as well lead to an improvement of the trade balance and growth.

Part e: 1. Tarrif diagram, explanation of increased consumer surplus and net welfare gain But Producer surplus and tax revenue would fall. Moreover imports would increase deteriorating the current account.

2. They hope to attract FDI + benefits of FDI with ad/as diagram But cost of FDI.

extra evaluation: lower tarrifs mean that domestic firms may be unable to compete. If their revenue falls enough to reach the shutdown point they would close down creating unemployment. This would in turn increase inequality and could lead to a fiscal deficit.

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you