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

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Can someone please make a prediction for unit 4?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I did context 2 and in the 10 marker I defined equity and equality and then talked only about wage discrimination...is it still possible to get maximum marks? I wrote a whole side on wage discrimination
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    Hmmm... has anyone here chosen the equality and equity section?

    Please tell me equity was the positive statement testable as a fact with the use of the GINI, and equality the normative statement depending on people's opinions and political persuasion..... I think I already know the answer to that but meh.

    Would a lot of marks be lost because of such a mix up?
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ghost12345)
    I did context 2 and in the 10 marker I defined equity and equality and then talked only about wage discrimination...is it still possible to get maximum marks? I wrote a whole side on wage discrimination
    As long as you have a long enough logic train of thought in the essay you should. Although I think you can be awarded only a maximum of 6 marks to one string of logic, hmm.... so if you have one graph and a couple definitions you really should be fine for a 10 marker.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    For the essay 1, 15 marker which was ' explain with economic theory wy perfectly competitive markets are allocatively effcient' what did you all write
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    I did context 2 and in the 10 marker, I defined equity and equality but then only talked about wage discrimination- still possible to get max marks? I wrote a whole side on wage discrimination
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    For the 1st question in section 2, I did not talk about oligopolies at all, how badly will this impact my mark?
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ghost12345)
    I did context 2 and in the 10 marker, I defined equity and equality but then only talked about wage discrimination- still possible to get max marks? I wrote a whole side on wage discrimination
    Could you say how you defined the two?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by meimaths123)
    For the essay 1, 15 marker which was ' explain with economic theory wy perfectly competitive markets are allocatively effcient' what did you all write
    SR - allocative efficient, prod inefficient
    LR- allocative efficient, prod efficient, x, static

    used the SR LR PC diagram for analysis

    dynamically inefficient tho
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NotoriousS)
    For the 1st question in section 2, I did not talk about oligopolies at all, how badly will this impact my mark?
    Idk. If it makes you feel better I only did 6 lines on oligopoly as i ran out of time.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by NotoriousS)
    For the 1st question in section 2, I did not talk about oligopolies at all, how badly will this impact my mark?
    I didn't talk about oligopolies as well but I told my economics teacher about the other stuff that i wrote and she said it was good without mentioning oligopolies..
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Caius Filimon)
    Could you say how you defined the two?
    Equity is concerned with how resources are distributed throughout society and then I defined vertical + horizontal equity and equality is concerned with fairness and so is normative and then I talked about inequality and gave a cause of it
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BirdIsWord)
    SR - allocative efficient, prod inefficient
    LR- allocative efficient, prod efficient, x, static

    used the SR LR PC diagram for analysis

    dynamically inefficient tho
    Do you think it was necessary to talk about the other types of efficiency even though it only talked about allocative efficiency? I didn't
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ghost12345)
    Equity is concerned with how resources are distributed throughout society and then I defined vertical + horizontal equity and equality is concerned with fairness and so is normative and then I talked about inequality and gave a cause of it
    Thank you!

    And thank goodness; I think I also said equality is normative.

    Do you think it would be bad if I did not talk about the vertical/horizontal equity but instead say that equity is positive because it can be measured through the use of the GINI coefficient? :/ I mostly talked about distribution of income/wealth (used the two interchangeably, sadly). But meh, it was only a 10 marker... so if anything I lost 2 marks from the definitions. Surely one would still get one mark per definition for a good (but perhaps partially wrong) attempt.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ghost12345)
    Do you think it was necessary to talk about the other types of efficiency even though it only talked about allocative efficiency? I didn't
    Uhh you should have at least mentioned Productive and Allocative man
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BirdIsWord)
    Uhh you should have at least mentioned Productive and Allocative man
    If that was the perf compet question, do you think it was a bad idea to mention reasons as to why perf competition might not show how productive efficiency may be achieved? Due to the lack of supernormal profits and as such little chance for dynamic efficiency. Or economies of scale in terms of static efficiency due to small firm sizes.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Caius Filimon)
    If that was the perf compet question, do you think it was a bad idea to mention reasons as to why perf competition might not show how productive efficiency may be achieved? Due to the lack of supernormal profits and as such little chance for dynamic efficiency. Or economies of scale in terms of static efficiency due to small firm sizes.
    The only time perfect competition is not productively efficient is in the short run..
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BirdIsWord)
    The only time perfect competition is not productively efficient is in the short run..
    Also in the long run in terms of dynamic efficiency because of reasons given before.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by BirdIsWord)
    Uhh you should have at least mentioned Productive and Allocative man
    That wasn't what the question was asking though
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ghost12345)
    That wasn't what the question was asking though
    The question was asking why PC is seen as efficient.

    (Original post by Caius Filimon)
    Also in the long run in terms of dynamic efficiency because of reasons given before.
    Yes, there is no dynamic efficiency in the long or short run.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the PM's proposal to cut tuition fees for some courses?

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.