The Student Room Group

AQA A-level Economics new 7136 - 06, 13 & 19 Jun 2017 [Exam Discussion]

Scroll to see replies

Original post by Holdsworth1
Was it relevant to talk about the issues relating to structural unemployment for the 25 marker, and the need for government intervention to help solve the issues relating to unemployment and the occupational immobility of labour in the economy? Because if not unemployment can have serious impacts on the economic performance if the government doesn't intervene to help this issue in the steel industry?



I spoke about this too ~
Can anyone remember the wording of the 10 and 15 i want to ask my teacher about them but cant even remember what they exactly asked for?
Reply 1182
Original post by Anthony27
This is roughly what I did for the questions, did anyone else do something similar or think this sounds valid?

10 marker
Basically said that the manufacturing sector has declined but it isn't in decline then briefly talked about part 3 of extract C not being relevant as it only showed prices not quantity

15 marker
Talked about cheaper wages elsewhere leading to less demand in the UK for manufacturers
Improvements in technology mean we don't require as many workers
Income elasticity of demand being greater for services rather than goods

25 marker
Paragraph one:They could intervene by way of lower business rates until the UK regains a comparative advantage but countered saying that there will always be lower wage rates + time of austerity

Paragraph two: Intervention through lax environmental laws means no direct impact to anyone+no cost. Countered talking about tragedy of the commons and risk of regulatory capture i.e every time costs rise they go to the government for help

Paragraph three: Short term would see unemployment spike but long term cheaper prices and the increase in supply would mean firms need labour so more manufacturing jobs become available.

Concluded saying that intervention shouldn't happen, also cited Thatcher and the coal mines saying that whilst unpopular it worked and this was on a larger scale (4 million unemployed vs 30,000)


Talked about very similar points :smile:
Original post by Harry9888
Can anyone remember the wording of the 10 and 15 i want to ask my teacher about them but cant even remember what they exactly asked for?


10 marker: To what extent if at all is UK manufacturing in decline
15: Explain why advanced economies experiencing economic growth will see employment in manufacturing fall and employment in services rise.
Original post by MB98Yeezy
For 15 marks I said about services being more elastic (was mentioned in the extracts), cheaper overseas and that higher skills & living standards in rich nations meant they don't work in manuf as much but I acknowledged that some manufacturing is high skill e.g. Space tech

Anyone know if this is valid?

Wasn't services more income inelastic



Posted from TSR Mobile
wasnt services more income inelastic
Original post by Dinklebop
Well, it didn't show prices, it showed the balance of trade in goods (imports/exports and the balance). You could have used that to support a point about the UK manufacturing higher value goods (export value rose in the period, despite fall in output).


Yeah, I used that extract to say it shows more that there may have been a change in the nature of the products we export as opposed to the quantity. Basically a move from low skilled manufacturing to higher skilled
For the 15 mark question did anyone else talk about a PPF for goods and services?
I said inelastic services also helped with terms of trade, is that even at all relevant or? Pretty sure I subconsciously wrote that


Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by mo501
For the 25 marker - I wrote about REASONS FOR intervention and REASONS AGAINST. I didn't really talk about which methods of intervention, because I felt that the question was asking for reasons not methods of intervention. Is this alright?



Yeah that's fine, I spoke to my teacher after and either is okay as long as you included some evaluation maybe about possible policies which could be used in intervention e.g. Intervention to prevent structural unemployment could be a subsidy so they can afford to continue running the loss making business. Then maybe eval that saying this is very expensive and it may lead to X inefficiency so it could be better to use SSP like technical colleges to ease the impact of structural unemployment in allowing the industry to collapse and reduce occupational immobility maybe. But yeah in short that's fine cause it's actually answering the question.
Original post by junky27
Anyone remember any of their mcqs


Don't remember the questions but remember some answers
126
46.5 or something
Real wage unemployment
For the value judgment it was the choice with politics in it
Lras out due to productivity
Inflation one was fall in real income
2000-3000
Anyone know the bond yield?
Fall in mortgages rates for the brick one as labour derived d
Max price for bulbs
Mrpl= revenue gained from extra unit sold produced by worker
+12 for the last one
Reduction in illiteracy for hdi
Reduction in inequality for gini
What did people put marginal product labour
The tax is £5000.
The one regarding marginal propensity to consume, I believe, is 37.5mn/bn.
Original post by Remaine
The tax is £5000.
The one regarding marginal propensity to consume, I believe, is 37.5mn/bn.


47.5?
Original post by Remaine
The tax is £5000.
The one regarding marginal propensity to consume, I believe, is 37.5mn/bn.


I knew the tax wasn't 12000 so I managed to remove the choice which most people would go for.
But when I tried to do the calculations, I wasn't getting any of those answers.

Do you remember if one of the choices was 5500? If so I think i went for that one. If not then i probably went for 5000
Could someone tell me if they reckon what I wrote is enough to get an A*?
31- I spoke about how figure 2 shows falling out but said how it isnt really that significant. Also spoke about how there was a significant fall in employment but then evaluated by saying that it could be due to rising productivity. Then, spoke about how the percentage increase in imports were more than exports showing a lack of international competitiveness and a bit on the average growth rate.

32- spoke about how economic growth is caused by rising technology which allows for better productivity. Analyzed this to get to how this reduces unemployment in the man. industry. For services, I mentioned that the income elasticity of demand is high, economic growth leads to rising incomes, that means more demand and demand for labor is derivied with demand for the good.

33- Reasons for - Prevent rising unemployment, help to reduce the trade deficit, how steel is an essential good in other markets so it could have a knock on effect.
Reasons against - Cost involved, government failure, the risk of certain policies eg. protectionism to help improve competition.
Final judgement - depends on the type of intervention. How likely would gov failure be? In the short run, yes. In the long run, maybe not.
Of course, everything i wrote was written in much greater detail and evaluation but just as points, do you think its enough for an A*?
Original post by SWISH99
47.5?


Oh, 47.5? Okay, fair enough, 37.5 isn't an option then.

@Kholmes1 - I believe 5000 was Option A and 5500 was Option B.
(edited 6 years ago)
What's did you guys get for the mcq with a table of values for GDP inflation population and gini, 6%,4%,1% and -0.8%.
I put increase in living standards but I was unsure between this and rise in inequality as I thought -0.8% was good for equality
Reply 1197
The 15 and 25 markers for this paper 3; what were the micro concepts and diagrams that could have been included because the content seemed very macroeconomic heavy for a synoptic paper
Original post by J2671
The 15 and 25 markers for this paper 3; what were the micro concepts and diagrams that could have been included because the content seemed very macroeconomic heavy for a synoptic paper


technological change, productive efficiency + allocative efficiency when discussing a tariff diagram, implications on other industries like auto manufacturing and the need to cut costs if steel prices rise, poverty in Port Talbot if the steel plant shut down, labour markets, negative production externality - when discussing the env reg policies, MRP diagram when talking about how wages rise in the 15 marker - rise in econ growth leads to increase AD - labour is a derived demand - MRP rises - wages rise - leads to outsourcing to china etc.
Does this sound acceptable-

10 marker:
Defined terms
Chain of reasoning
2 reasons showing how industry not in decline e.g some growth last through years all be it by a small amount and another one I can't remember.

2 no- production fallen by a million tonnes, large job losses etc

Final judgement- not in decline and data inaccurate as it fails to take into account financial crash in 2007 which would have had a large effect on the industry.


15 marker-

Intro-
Define terms

Point 1- productivity harder to increase though technology in services so these workers are possibly more skilled as computers can't take their jobs- higher Mrp than workers in manufacturing- higher demand for them and higher wages.

2 labour mkt diagrams- increase D for labour in services fall D manufacturing

2nd- some manufacturing goods likely to be commodities and necesssities- income inelastic so changes in price have a small change in qd- services income elastic and so as incomes rise a lot more is demanded resulting in higher employment here.

3rd points competitive advantage in China means they can produce cheaper goods with cheaper labour so more emphasis in U.K. Placed on devices- higher employment.

Used lots of data and added in 2016 UK 20 billion surplus on invisibles and financial service comparative advantage

25 marker
Into- define terms

Point1- yew intervene- remove tax lower COP increase AS lower prices higher GDP

Evaluated- used data spoke about how increase GDP would reverse the fall of 20% extract A. Used China can't remember how. Micro level- less taxes- dyn prod eff lower ACS (diagram) and increase equity consumers. Evaluated no but can't remember how

2 point- yes but diiffernt approach- nationalisation as industry currently characterised by lots of small firms. Nationalisation- improve quality uk steel through supernormal profits and also more efficiency

2 diagrams- perf comp to nationalisation. Used data

Evaluated- no time said something

Conclusion- evaluated my essay/ said a more through look is needed and China's low economic growth and external factors may be biggest problem in relation to the steal industry etc.

Multiple choice- 22/30

Will I get an A do you reckon?

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

No trending threads to show

Trending

No trending threads to show