Join TSR now and get all your revision questions answeredSign up now

Economics Unit 2 Edexcel - Managing the UK economy Tuesday 19th May 2015 (PM) Watch

    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AJC1997)
    for you and anyone else wondering, the EXACT wording of the 30 marker for question 1 (I have the paper) is:

    'To what extend do demand-side policies lead to conflicts between macroeconomic objectives?'
    Although not the news I wanted to hear, thanks for the confirmation! At least now I can put it to rest
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    does anyone have the paper
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    No, this is wrong for what people said about causes of investment. It said how investment changed between 2008 to 2013, not whether it increased or decreased. My teacher always said do more points than what was stated, and I did 3 points. I talked mainly however about why investment decreased - e.g. due to interest rates and confidence levels. On the other hand I gave a statement and explanation about why investment increased as it did. It did not specify therefore one can not assume that it is based entirely on 2008 to 2013. Remember the word was "BETWEEN", and investment fluctuated.

    Don't worry, you will get the marks if you talked about both. I've confirmed it with quite a few teachers. Also, to maximize marks, even when it said "Analyse 2 reasons". If you did 4 and explain, examiners will mark the 2 best explanations you gave.

    Overall, it was a good paper, in my opinion. Now can you please stfu about economics, its done!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by miadkh)
    does anyone have the paper
    yes, want anything clarified?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smash98)
    No, this is wrong for what people said about causes of investment. It said how investment changed between 2008 to 2013, not whether it increased or decreased. My teacher always said do more points than what was stated, and I did 3 points. I talked mainly however about why investment decreased - e.g. due to interest rates and confidence levels. On the other hand I gave a statement and explanation about why investment increased as it did. It did not specify therefore one can not assume that it is based entirely on 2008 to 2013. Remember the word was "BETWEEN", and investment fluctuated.

    Don't worry, you will get the marks if you talked about both. I've confirmed it with quite a few teachers. Also, to maximize marks, even when it said "Analyse 2 reasons". If you did 4 and explain, examiners will mark the 2 best explanations you gave.

    Overall, it was a good paper, in my opinion. Now can you please stfu about economics, its done!

    And Mr Samba stop trying to depress people, your wrong! How do you like it now!
    Question - 'With reference to Figure 1, explain two likely factors that caused the change in UK business investment between 2008 and 2013'

    Define Investment/use data reference to show that investment decreased from the peak in 2008 to a much lower figure in 2013.

    One likely factor is....interest rates...explain

    a second likely factor is...business confidence...explain

    = 8/8 marks

    also If I did more reasons than was asked, It would be a waste of time and the examiners probably prefer a simple straightforward structure that's easy to follow

    Guess everyone is taught differently, not saying anything you said is wrong, sure you did well
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    What if for my reasons about investment decreasing, if the data reference for it decreased was not from 2008 to 2013 but from another period in between where it was decreasing. E.g. from 2012 to 2013, if I can remember investment fell. What if I stated that investment decreased from this period and explained my points. Is that a valid data reference as it wasn't asking from 2008 to 2013, it just said between, so im sure they will award you marks if you find any two years in which is decreased.

    Also, by doing more than what is necessary is not a waste of time at all. You want to make sure the examiners don't have anywhere to drop you marks . Especially if you want a very high grade.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smash98)
    What if for my reasons about investment decreasing, if the data reference for it decreased was not from 2008 to 2013 but from another period in between where it was decreasing.
    I'm sure that would be fine as it's between 08-13 and I think the main focus was that in 2008 investment was very high at one point and then decreased as a general trend from there, with some small fluctuations
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Lool . For the other question, about business investment when referring to data in Figure 1, that's when I said the overall trend. As there was only one diagram you could talk about. However they said with reference twice, normally they wouldn't award you with the same data reference used twice in your exam, so I used a different one.

    I worked my way backwards, doing 30,12,12,8,8,4,6
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smash98)
    Lool . For the other question, about business investment when referring to data in Figure 1, that's when I said the overall trend. As there was only one diagram you could talk about. However they said with reference twice, normally they wouldn't award you with the same data reference used twice in your exam, so I used a different one.

    I worked my way backwards, doing 30,12,12,8,8,4,6
    same, I worked backwards but that made the 30 marker take wayyy too much of my time
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    What was the first question on question 1?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smash98)
    No, this is wrong for what people said about causes of investment. It said how investment changed between 2008 to 2013, not whether it increased or decreased. My teacher always said do more points than what was stated, and I did 3 points. I talked mainly however about why investment decreased - e.g. due to interest rates and confidence levels. On the other hand I gave a statement and explanation about why investment increased as it did. It did not specify therefore one can not assume that it is based entirely on 2008 to 2013. Remember the word was "BETWEEN", and investment fluctuated.

    Don't worry, you will get the marks if you talked about both. I've confirmed it with quite a few teachers. Also, to maximize marks, even when it said "Analyse 2 reasons". If you did 4 and explain, examiners will mark the 2 best explanations you gave.

    Overall, it was a good paper, in my opinion. Now can you please stfu about economics, its done!
    Thank you! I hope this clears this up for those (member1753327) who said that investment only decreased, which is not what the question asked!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Swaany)
    Thank you! I hope this clears this up for those (member1753327) who said that investment only decreased, which is not what the question asked!
    Lets say neither sides are wrong on this one, there were small fluctuations in investment, but the main focus was that investment decreased from a high point in 2008 and never recovered to anywhere near this point.

    I'm sure they will accept points about the small increases, but points regarding the decrease make more sense imo
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by eatthetree)
    What was the first question on question 1?
    (a) (i) 'With reference to Figure 1, explain two factors that might account for the change in the household savings ratio since the third quarter of 2012.'
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AJC1997)
    Lets say neither sides are wrong on this one, there were small fluctuations in investment, but the main focus was that investment decreased from a high point in 2008 and never recovered to anywhere near this point.

    I'm sure they will accept points about the small increases, but points regarding the decrease make more sense imo
    I guess you're right.. lets hope they accept the former point
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AJC1997)
    yes, want anything clarified?
    ya i was wondering where i can get a copy
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    For the 8 marker on business investment would I get marks for saying business confidence and changes in income ?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Smash98)
    No, this is wrong for what people said about causes of investment. It said how investment changed between 2008 to 2013, not whether it increased or decreased. My teacher always said do more points than what was stated, and I did 3 points. I talked mainly however about why investment decreased - e.g. due to interest rates and confidence levels. On the other hand I gave a statement and explanation about why investment increased as it did. It did not specify therefore one can not assume that it is based entirely on 2008 to 2013. Remember the word was "BETWEEN", and investment fluctuated.

    Don't worry, you will get the marks if you talked about both. I've confirmed it with quite a few teachers. Also, to maximize marks, even when it said "Analyse 2 reasons". If you did 4 and explain, examiners will mark the 2 best explanations you gave.

    Overall, it was a good paper, in my opinion. Now can you please stfu about economics, its done!
    Investment didnt fall because of interest rates you moron it feel because of the recession, interest rates had been constant at 5% before that for several years, they did not change till after the recssion to 0,5%, it's contextually wrong!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AJC1997)
    Question - 'With reference to Figure 1, explain two likely factors that caused the change in UK business investment between 2008 and 2013'

    Define Investment/use data reference to show that investment decreased from the peak in 2008 to a much lower figure in 2013.

    One likely factor is....interest rates...explain

    a second likely factor is...business confidence...explain

    = 8/8 marks

    also If I did more reasons than was asked, It would be a waste of time and the examiners probably prefer a simple straightforward structure that's easy to follow

    Guess everyone is taught differently, not saying anything you said is wrong, sure you did well
    Investment did not fall because of a change in interest rates! that is completely wrong in the context of the UK economy ! Interest rates were steady at 5% before the recession and only fell to 0.5% afterards therefore there was no relation between the level of interest rates and investment in tis particular incident ! it fell mainly because of the recession lowering business and consumer confidence! you are expected to know basic economic trends; i'm not even from the UK and i know this! You have to be specific to the UK because they said with reference to the figure (which related to the UK and gave a specific time period 0f 2008-2013 friend). You guys cant just regurgitate stuff you learn from the textbook and just apply them to everything, you have to apply them to a particular situation
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Praveen101)
    Investment did not fall because of a change in interest rates! that is completely wrong in the context of the UK economy ! Interest rates were steady at 5% before the recession and only fell to 0.5% afterards therefore there was no relation between the level of interest rates and investment in tis particular incident ! it fell mainly because of the recession lowering business and consumer confidence! you are expected to know basic economic trends; i'm not even from the UK and i know this! You have to be specific to the UK because they said with reference to the figure (which related to the UK and gave a specific time period 0f 2008-2013 friend). You guys cant just regurgitate stuff you learn from the textbook and just apply them to everything, you have to apply them to a particular situation
    In AS economics answers aren't supposed to be contextual otherwise stated to use the case study, not a figure. I totally agree with you, yes what you said was factual and correct, but students can assume other events which might have happened, and gain marks for them, interest rate is not correct, although it works, but I did not use it because I knew that they were 0.5% after the general trend, so I put two different points which would be higher corp tax and increase in NMW which are both factual and can be seen in government statistics, I think other points would be marked without hesitation (not the % rate change), but good point
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by member1753327)
    In AS economics answers aren't supposed to be contextual otherwise stated to use the case study, not a figure. I totally agree with you, yes what you said was factual and correct, but students can assume other events which might have happened, and gain marks for them, interest rate is not correct, although it works, but I did not use it because I knew that they were 0.5% after the general trend, so I put two different points which would be higher corp tax and increase in NMW which are both factual and can be seen in government statistics, I think other points would be marked without hesitation (not the % rate change), but good point
    Bro they made specific reference giving a country (The UK) and aspecficic time period (2008-2013) in the question, they cant award marks for something that was incorrect, they expect you to have basic knowledge about the UK economy, there's nothing more simple than the level of interest rates..
 
 
 
Poll
How are you feeling about GCSE Results Day?

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.