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

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jonses)
    I preferred the global context question too. The 25 marker was about Middle East and North African countries, asking to what extent the UK should be concerned by a strengthening of the economic importance of these countries. Pretty open, lots of usable points in the data.
    I talked about the standard points. increased growth for uk, potentially better and worse B.O.P, potentially higher and lower inflation, potentially higher and lower unemployment :P

    Then linked it all to the text. inward investment into the UK, b.o.p. could get worse if certain uk industries displaced, but uk mostly tertiary so might not have a huge impact. higher inflation through increased AD through export rises and increased investment to uk, but if there is economic growth then firms are more likely to invest in MENA potentially unlocking more resources hence increasing supply and deflationary pressures. but inflation could also rise due to unrest shrinking supply. Talked about how mature economies such as the UK are better off due to stuff like diversity within their natural resource outlets (i.e. they have the north sea oil field so potentially self-sufficient in the future). unemployment likely to fall overall from the higher growth but could have bouts of structural unemployment.

    said that there are potential issues, but maybe due to geographical proximity plus the fact that productivity in MENA countries is low, could lead to the effects being limited?

    etccccccccc

    Is that ok :O?
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ecomax)
    I did the same question, different structure though

    First talked about effect of Supply side policies (Reduction in Corp tax, Deregulation, Improvement in the occupational mobility of labour) on the balance of trade and evaluated, stating it has a positive effect blah .. but long term and does not solve anything in the short run, leads to reduction in living standards in the short run and evaluated with macro eco indicators

    Then said however alternative policies could be used, i.e Expenditure Switching, Expenditure reducing .. with Evaluation

    Then concluded that supply side policies are effective in improving the balance of trade in goods .. could reduce structural deficit, but there are drawbacks in the short run (relating to current government policy), also stating that expenditure switching and reducing policies can have some success in the short run.
    Then as a last point questioning whether the deficit in the balance of trade is a bad thing .. explaining that the total deficit is 3% of GDP, the deficit is structural though ..)

    Probably other stuff but thats all i can remember, rushed for time a bit in evaluating expenditure switching policies
    Sounds good, I should've talked about why the deficit could be good too =( e.g. importing capital goods etc.
    Balls.

    I didn't know whether to link back to the other macro indicators, apart from growth, since it just mainly concentrated on the BOP.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I think I did ok on the side whether the EU should help the UK growth, but what did you lot who did that question put on the negative side saying that it wouldn't help?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I did context one thought it was much nicer to talk about. Loadssss of potential evaluation.

    Just a quick question, for some reason (unbeknown to me) I didn't write all of my question numbers down -_-) will this be an issue? Panicking slightly especially as I thought it was a decent paper....

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kelbel1)
    Ooyar, can't really remember if i'm honest! For the EU, I literally went through the extract, highlighted everything I need and used all of it, didn't need to think of anything because it was all there! x
    Oh God, I couldn't see much there to use if I'm honest. I quoted stuff like UK inflation decreasing, tight fiscal policy, not all EU members were in recession etc. But, maybe its just me lol. It takes me a little longer to notice these things when I read through. You're quicker on your feet.

    How do you think it went overall?
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by charlie7wright)
    Anybody worried about the fact that they mentioned leaving the EU, don't be. If you related leaving the EU to developing stronger links with BRIC countries and how that might boost export-led growth you will still pick up marks.
    My whole essay wasn't on leaving the EU, however, I think I mentioned it really quickly in my conclusion that they should keep strong trade links and that they shouldn't think of leaving (just in case the question did mean that, even though I was like 90% it didn't)
    Hopefully, that doesn't make the examiner think I was talking about leaving the EU the whole way through O_o
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Axion)
    I talked about the standard points. increased growth for uk, potentially better and worse B.O.P, potentially higher and lower inflation, potentially higher and lower unemployment :P

    Then linked it all to the text. inward investment into the UK, b.o.p. could get worse if certain uk industries displaced, but uk mostly tertiary so might not have a huge impact. higher inflation through increased AD through export rises and increased investment to uk, but if there is economic growth then firms are more likely to invest in MENA potentially unlocking more resources hence increasing supply and deflationary pressures. but inflation could also rise due to unrest shrinking supply. Talked about how mature economies such as the UK are better off due to stuff like diversity within their natural resource outlets (i.e. they have the north sea oil field so potentially self-sufficient in the future). unemployment likely to fall overall from the higher growth but could have bouts of structural unemployment.

    said that there are potential issues, but maybe due to geographical proximity plus the fact that productivity in MENA countries is low, could lead to the effects being limited?

    etccccccccc

    Is that ok :O?

    I'm sure that's fine! I didn't actually use any of those points though, just shows how broad the question was!
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by charlie7wright)
    As long as you related it to an increase in export-led growth its fine. For example you could have mentioned that if the UK left the EU it could make better use of its comparative advantage in financial services and export to emerging economies.

    It sucks, I thought of that just at the end and didn't have time to write it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Quick question - with regards to the 5 marker on context 2, would a valid point to pick out be the fact that the annual % change in actual GDP for each economy in 2011, excluding Spain and France, had decreased in comparison to their figures for annual % change in actual GDP in 2010? A bit worried that I may not get marks for that point. :s
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jonses)
    I'm sure that's fine! I didn't actually use any of those points though, just shows how broad the question was!
    ohhh :/// what points did I miss?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Can someone who did context 1 check what I wrote :/. Worried I did it wrong

    I talked about the standard points. increased growth for uk, potentially better and worse B.O.P, potentially higher and lower inflation, potentially higher and lower unemployment :P

    Then linked it all to the text. inward investment into the UK, b.o.p. could get worse if certain uk industries displaced, but uk mostly tertiary so might not have a huge impact. higher inflation through increased AD through export rises and increased investment to uk, but if there is economic growth then firms are more likely to invest in MENA potentially unlocking more resources hence increasing supply and deflationary pressures. but inflation could also rise due to unrest shrinking supply. Talked about how mature economies such as the UK are better off due to stuff like diversity within their natural resource outlets (i.e. they have the north sea oil field so potentially self-sufficient in the future). unemployment likely to fall overall from the higher growth but could have bouts of structural unemployment.

    said that there are potential issues, but maybe due to geographical proximity plus the fact that productivity in MENA countries is low, could lead to the effects being limited?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Username123)
    Quick question - with regards to the 5 marker on context 2, would a valid point to pick out be the fact that the annual % change in actual GDP for each economy in 2011, excluding Spain and France, had decreased in comparison to their figures for annual % change in actual GDP in 2010? A bit worried that I may not get marks for that point. :s
    I don't think that's significant but you may get some marks

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    For a significant point of context 2, could you say about Spain being the only country between the two years to have a negative figure of "-0.1%"..?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Axion)
    Can someone who did context 1 check what I wrote :/. Worried I did it wrong

    I talked about the standard points. increased growth for uk, potentially better and worse B.O.P, potentially higher and lower inflation, potentially higher and lower unemployment :P

    Then linked it all to the text. inward investment into the UK, b.o.p. could get worse if certain uk industries displaced, but uk mostly tertiary so might not have a huge impact. higher inflation through increased AD through export rises and increased investment to uk, but if there is economic growth then firms are more likely to invest in MENA potentially unlocking more resources hence increasing supply and deflationary pressures. but inflation could also rise due to unrest shrinking supply. Talked about how mature economies such as the UK are better off due to stuff like diversity within their natural resource outlets (i.e. they have the north sea oil field so potentially self-sufficient in the future). unemployment likely to fall overall from the higher growth but could have bouts of structural unemployment.

    said that there are potential issues, but maybe due to geographical proximity plus the fact that productivity in MENA countries is low, could lead to the effects being limited?
    Ye that's sounds alright. I put most of that. Went on to say that an indebted UK consumer and government means internal recovery is unrealistic and that export growth would be highly beneficial. But then said how we do little trade currently with emerging economies so, MENA growth may be insignificant. Also talked about the damage MENA countries via economic growth could do to the environment and the affect on UK consumer welfare this could entail. Then concluded by saying there could be a potential worry if their reliance on oil money falls as a result of their increasing economic power, and thus they are able to charge whatever proce they want for it - holding all the cards in effect.

    Didn't mention BOP though...wish I had :/

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Axion)
    ohhh :/// what points did I miss?
    It's not that you missed any, I think we just approached it from different angles. Just trying to remember; I spoke about how the extent to which it would concern the UK depends on the manufactured products and services that MENA countries specialised in i.e if they were products the UK make, it could impact trade but unlikely to cause UK concern

    The extent to which MENA countries were strengthening their importance-- how much is significant and who this is more likely to affect.. magnitude and incidence covered for evaluation.

    Also shouldn't concern UK massively as the MENA countries were facing difficulties, depends on the time it takes them to overcome these and whether they look to FDI from UK to appease this.. quoted some of Iraq's figures from the table to back these up. Oh and also the speed at which this would even happen, if it was a gradual growth in development UK would be able to anticipate and resolve to whatever extent it affected them. I also mentioned that this could be countered by the statement from the article about the other countries "following Jordan's lead" and the argument that Jordan had established FTAs

    Whether it could be beneficial for UK economy.. can't remember my point for that!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jonses)
    It's not that you missed any, I think we just approached it from different angles. Just trying to remember; I spoke about how the extent to which it would concern the UK depends on the manufactured products and services that MENA countries specialised in i.e if they were products the UK make, it could impact trade but unlikely to cause UK concern

    The extent to which MENA countries were strengthening their importance-- how much is significant and who this is more likely to affect.. magnitude and incidence covered for evaluation.

    Also shouldn't concern UK massively as the MENA countries were facing difficulties, depends on the time it takes them to overcome these and whether they look to FDI from UK to appease this.. quoted some of Iraq's figures from the table to back these up. Oh and also the speed at which this would even happen, if it was a gradual growth in development UK would be able to anticipate and resolve to whatever extent it affected them. I also mentioned that this could be countered by the statement from the article about the other countries "following Jordan's lead" and the argument that Jordan had established FTAs

    Whether it could be beneficial for UK economy.. can't remember my point for that!
    fair enough

    lool thought i had done it wrong for a second! that 'if all' in the question was what probably caused the split
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by blade63)
    Ye that's sounds alright. I put most of that. Went on to say that an indebted UK consumer and government means internal recovery is unrealistic and that export growth would be highly beneficial. But then said how we do little trade currently with emerging economies so, MENA growth may be insignificant. Also talked about the damage MENA countries via economic growth could do to the environment and the affect on UK consumer welfare this could entail. Then concluded by saying there could be a potential worry if their reliance on oil money falls as a result of their increasing economic power, and thus they are able to charge whatever proce they want for it - holding all the cards in effect.

    Didn't mention BOP though...wish I had :/

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    im sure you didnt have to mention b.o.p.

    Hope we both did well
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Axion)
    fair enough

    lool thought i had done it wrong for a second! that 'if all' in the question was what probably caused the split
    Haha probably! It also doesn't help that I completely forgot my exam technique (same as you, to evaluate effects on each of gov's macro objectives) and just blitzed through the question to get to the essay!
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    I did context 1 and essay 1. It was generally a nice paper aside from the 15 marker of essay1 I got confused so I failed it terribly.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Okay so I did Context 2 (which I'm really worried I totally screwed up) and then the 2nd essay question on the deficit

    For Context 2:
    1. 75bn
    2. One demand side cause (lower demand for goods / services meaning lower demand for workers) and one supply side cause (recession likely to affect other countries, not just the UK, meaning they may increase prices of their exports to address this - cost push inflation, factors of production more expensive so unemployment rises)
    3. Talked a LOT about the EU and the way in which it is our main trading partner so the improvement of the performance lead to a rise in the number of exports, however high marginal propensity to import so does not necessarily lead to B of P improving so not necessarily growth? Also how labour allocation is more efficient, reducing unemployment and stimulating growth, BUT also the argument that unemployment is created if you see domestic and foreign labour as substitutes? Then the way the EU is not necessarily creating trade but rather diverting trade away from other countries due to the common external tariff, so focusing upon other developing countries may not necessarily lessen trade. Concluded that the EU is important but without it, it wouldn't hugely hinder the chance of recovery.

    For the essay 2:
    1. Causes of the deficit: high marginal propensity to import, uncompetitiveness of UK goods due to underinvestment in labour / fixed capital, high exchange rate up until 2008 but a more recent excuse is the weak economies of main export mains (e.g. EU)
    2. Explained supply side policy as attempting to increase demand for exports, which demand-side policies attempt to reduce demand for imports. Supply-side methods such as focusing more upon the manufacturing of goods, rather than services as they are much easier to sell, and also education and training to improve quality of goods which are demanded in countries such as EU. Then talked about expenditure-switching (eg. devaluation) but this may be ineffective due to J-curve and Marshall-Lerner, and talked a bit about expenditure reducing, however the contractionary policies may conflict with other macroeconomic objective. Concluded that they are not substitutes but should be used together, however due to the prolonged deficit since 1983 supply-side policies may be more effective in tackling the root of the problem even though they may take longer to introduce.

    Opinions?
 
 
 
  • 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
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
  • 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

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