AQA Economics 18th May 2012 Unit 1 Exam

It was supposedly -1.33

My essay intro was so bad. Said it was a public good and like wrote 2 more lines haha. And my conclusion was rushed but i tried to make it decent, what did you put in the 12 marker?

Which way did you guys shift your graphs on Q3 and Q4 on the NHS Question?

isnt the chemical fertilisers the right answer for land

isnt the chemical fertilisers the right answer for land

I worked it out to be 2? Are you sure?

I did pretty much the same, but merged adv's and disadv's into 2 separate paragraphs instead of one then the other. Did the taxation diagram just to give an example of one policy to account for -ve externalities.

I worked it out to be 2? Are you sure?

I just used taxation as an example of government failure because I assumed the demand was price inelastic which meant the taxation would have no effect on the amount supplied/demanded, plus someone must collect the tax that the government has to pay which is an example of misallocation of resources.

There's so many different interpretations from everyone

I just used taxation as an example of government failure because I assumed the demand was price inelastic which meant the taxation would have no effect on the amount supplied/demanded, plus someone must collect the tax that the government has to pay which is an example of misallocation of resources.

There's so many different interpretations from everyone

I worked it out to be 2? Are you sure?

For the 1st question on mining.

I put for the 25 marker negative externalities. I drew a negative externalities of production diagram with MPC greater than MSC. Mining is a negative externality. I then defined negative externalities etc.

I then talked about what would happen if the government didn't intervene, i.e. environment will become perhaps so bad that it could not be cleaned up! Firms will be doing whatever they wish, i.e. polluting lakes.

I then went on to say what government intervention could happen i.e. maximum pricing, reducing the incentive to mine for rare-earth metals as China can not price the metals at whatever it wants, this decreases its profits. Regulations, i.e. banning pollution in rivers and a certain amount of pollution can be released. Pollution permits could be used to benefit firms who do not pollute as they can sell pollution permits who need it. However, there will be an incentive for firms to decrease pollution as their costs will decrease.

Throughout it all I evaluated and concluded at the end.

I worked it out to be 2? Are you sure?

It was definitely 2 because it was -2.00
There was a 25% increase and a 50% increase
-2 x 50 = 25

I know it was a merit good, i said i did that as a mistake, but there can still be free riders, hence the waiting lists. And the graph, sure it was how i shown ages ago. Not done health care for like a year and a half now..

I did.. But got lost as soon as you said all your curves were horizontal?

I can't picture what your diagram would look like.

I worked it out to be 2? Are you sure?

Well the free rider concept means people consume without paying. With UK healthcare, nobody pays. But that's a small point.

You could be right, I just don't see how supply is perfectly inelastic. Healthcare provision can easily be increased. Your example with olympic tickets is completely different.