Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by loptopflop)
    Hi, can someone tell me if this is right, I did context 2 about mobile phones and wrote about taxation, regulation and education and why if the government inforced these they might work but light cause market failure? I did analyse them in quite a lot if detail but jut wondered if they were right?
    Thanks
    Yep I'd say that would be good, as long as you analysed well and evaluated why those policies are better than others to back up your point then that should be good.

    I didn't take the exam this series, took it in Jan but this series seems to be much harder :/
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I found the exam hard, I would honestly be happy with a D just so I can stay on the course next year, could anyone tell me if this would be enough on the 25 marks question to get a decent mark

    I chose context 2 and wrote about indirect taxes and campaigns to give information about the health risks of mobile phone and also to make sure suppliers ensure information is labelled on their product thought regulations. I done a graph of the effect indirect taxes would have on the supply of mobile phones is that correct. I didn't write very clearly and every was abit jumbled up but the information was their , could this be enough for a d grade

    Cheers Conor
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by conor14)
    I found the exam hard, I would honestly be happy with a D just so I can stay on the course next year, could anyone tell me if this would be enough on the 25 marks question to get a decent mark

    I chose context 2 and wrote about indirect taxes and campaigns to give information about the health risks of mobile phone and also to make sure suppliers ensure information is labelled on their product thought regulations. I done a graph of the effect indirect taxes would have on the supply of mobile phones is that correct. I didn't write very clearly and every was abit jumbled up but the information was their , could this be enough for a d grade

    Cheers Conor
    Hm yes should be, depends on your other answers.

    It's hard to judge with that information but as long as you analysed and had very LIMITED evaluation that's enough for a D.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I wrote about the same points! Except I didn't specify the tax as being indirect :/ you should be okay as you naturally tend to evaluate a 'for and against' question, plud it was easy to refer to the sources in that question. I'm sure you did well

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Brambs)
    I wrote about the same points! Except I didn't specify the tax as being indirect :/ you should be okay as you naturally tend to evaluate a 'for and against' question, plud it was easy to refer to the sources in that question. I'm sure you did well

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Stating an 'indirect tax" should not be a problem because you're showing that you do know the policy!

    Referring to the extracts always pushes your grade up because you can't actually achieve higher than 21 without referring to them!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Anyone tell us what they put for 03 and 04 on context 1 ?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    omds I drew a neg externalties diagram for context 2 25 marker saying that radiation causes cancer can I still get the marks
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    For context 2 I wrote about subsidising hands-free sets and imposing a minimum wage for asian workers in phone production, my reason for the government not influencing the market was very vague. What did people write for reasons against the government intervening for context 2?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sheldon Cooper10)
    omds I drew a neg externalties diagram for context 2 25 marker saying that radiation causes cancer can I still get the marks
    Phones are a demerit good as they can cause cancer
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hi guys

    I sat this exam this morning and I think it went ok. My essay was pushed for time. I chose context 2 and structured it like so:

    INTRO : Defined govt intervention. Only should be used if market failure can be evidenced and a policy that is economically viable and fair is found.

    1) Free market is thought to work well at allocation of resources. Analysis - price functions: incentive, rationing, signals. Evaluate, allocative efficiency is achieved (price = marginal cost).

    2) Calls for intervention to due market failure in the form of externalities (health + phone use whilst driving) + Market failure diagram showing negative externality.

    3) Policy could be education. Reduce output closer to socially optimum level due to reduced demand. BUT (evaluation) expensive (given budgetary frugality atm), long time period, dependent on audience and receptiveness, liberty (why can't we choose ourselves?), government failure. Therefore it is not viable.

    CONCLUSION : should be left to the free market, policy not suitable because of govt failure and variables of success. In the long run, firms entering the industry may lead to r & d which may reduce the negative externalities from health.

    What do you guys think of that as a structure? I was pushed for time, but hope my evaluation, of the free market's efficiency and the unsuitability of an education policy due to govt failure, will be sufficient to get good marks.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by morewig)
    For context 2 I wrote about subsidising hands-free sets and imposing a minimum wage for asian workers in phone production, my reason for the government not influencing the market was very vague. What did people write for reasons against the government intervening for context 2?
    I wrote about the benefits of free market (allocative efficiency) and the negatives of government failure, the cost of policies etc.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Sheldon Cooper10)
    omds I drew a neg externalties diagram for context 2 25 marker saying that radiation causes cancer can I still get the marks
    haha thats exactly what i did
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jmmby)
    Hi guys

    I sat this exam this morning and I think it went ok. My essay was pushed for time. I chose context 2 and structured it like so:

    INTRO : Defined govt intervention. Only should be used if market failure can be evidenced and a policy that is economically viable and fair is found.

    1) Free market is thought to work well at allocation of resources. Analysis - price functions: incentive, rationing, signals. Evaluate, allocative efficiency is achieved (price = marginal cost).

    2) Calls for intervention to due market failure in the form of externalities (health + phone use whilst driving) + Market failure diagram showing negative externality.

    3) Policy could be education. Reduce output closer to socially optimum level due to reduced demand. BUT (evaluation) expensive (given budgetary frugality atm), long time period, dependent on audience and receptiveness, liberty (why can't we choose ourselves?), government failure. Therefore it is not viable.

    CONCLUSION : should be left to the free market, policy not suitable because of govt failure and variables of success. In the long run, firms entering the industry may lead to r & d which may reduce the negative externalities from health.

    What do you guys think of that as a structure? I was pushed for time, but hope my evaluation, of the free market's efficiency and the unsuitability of an education policy due to govt failure, will be sufficient to get good marks.
    I had a similar sturcture to this switch your opening and 1) round and developed some ideas a bit more such as with health concerns there is no concrete evidence yet as phones are relativly new technology and diseases associated with mobile phones e.g. cancer take a long time to develop. However if they did in the long run it may burden the NHS and create an opportunity cost as less can be spent on infrastructure and this may worsen the standard of living of the population. then a paragraph on minimum prices and also as you said neg ext w/ information gap etc. Also in final evaluation talked about how economics is a social science so dont know how the market will respond, the need for more data such as price elasticity of demand to gain an idea as to whether intervention will make a difference (inelastic probs not), and ideas referring to regulation of phone mast locations. But summed up saying there is a case for intervention with some more evidence to back it although it may not be preferable by the population in the short run, it MAY benefit society in the long run
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MaxLikesNoodles)
    I had a similar sturcture to this switch your opening and 1) round and developed some ideas a bit more such as with health concerns there is no concrete evidence yet as phones are relativly new technology and diseases associated with mobile phones e.g. cancer take a long time to develop. However if they did in the long run it may burden the NHS and create an opportunity cost as less can be spent on infrastructure and this may worsen the standard of living of the population. then a paragraph on minimum prices and also as you said neg ext w/ information gap etc. Also in final evaluation talked about how economics is a social science so dont know how the market will respond, the need for more data such as price elasticity of demand to gain an idea as to whether intervention will make a difference (inelastic probs not), and ideas referring to regulation of phone mast locations. But summed up saying there is a case for intervention with some more evidence to back it although it may not be preferable by the population in the short run, it MAY benefit society in the long run
    Sounds a strong argument. Though mine focused mainly on hitting home about the benefits of free market, eg, allocative efficiency and freedom for the consumer and producer.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    lets put a mark schme for this together....

    1) D - maximise profits
    2) B - increased capital
    3) D - positive

    aeroplane one?
    marginal benefits one?
    money as a medium of exchange?
    total revenue one?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    did anyone take the paper out of the exam so it can be uploaded?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hellis161)
    lets put a mark schme for this together....

    1) D - maximise profits
    2) B - increased capital
    3) D - positive

    aeroplane one?
    marginal benefits one?
    money as a medium of exchange?
    total revenue one?

    areoplane was derived demand B
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MaxLikesNoodles)
    areoplane was derived demand B
    The total revenue one in the table was

    50 - 150 A



    The four diagrams of marginal cost, that one was C



    The one about money as a medium of exchange was B - Trade increases
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    This was by far the hardest paper out of any in the past according to my teacher. I did context 2.
    25 marker:
    INTRO: introduce the question and the issue that the text was posing
    FOR INTERVENTION: that there was issue of bad health from the phones, bad health is a negative externality and bares cost on NHS etc. said that good health was a merit good, so market failure evident. SUBSIDIES on headsets, used the extract for that, evaluated it. Education on the risks and on accidents, used the extract and evaluate.
    AGAINST INTERVENTION: that parts of the extract said evidence was that there was no health risk, so I said if so there was no need for governments to intervene, and there was a chance of government failure. Also forces of market and supply and demand usually solve market issues.
    CONCLUSION: that the government should intervene to prevent accidents, however not to prevent use as research inconclusive. Also must be done correctly to eliminate chance of govenet failure.


    Can anyone confirm if this is correct?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    i did context 2 and as my agaisnt argument i spoke about the large size of the smartphone market leading to innovation since firms might invest it in research and development, thus shifting ppf curve outwards. and i drew a ppf curve too.

    (this is a very brief version, and i refered to extract E)

    is this good enough for the argument? or how many marks do you reckon i might have gotten for it?
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.