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

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Realbigboi)
    How is government spending not a supply side policy are you saying spending into infrastructure isn't government spending or spending into education and training? That doesn't make sense mate. It can be used for multiple policies
    I said gov spending too bc I thought dereg and privatisation was too micro-y but I don't know if we'll get the mark!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by alicec11)
    I said gov spending too bc I thought dereg and privatisation was too micro-y but I don't know if we'll get the mark!
    If you said government spending on healthcare then this should be correct as it in theory should mean workers are taking less time off work, boosting productivity and shifting AS
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    For supply side policy can you say privatisation, as this means more firms will open up, and with more firms means more investment increasing productive capacity of economy as more workers hired shifting AS right?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    Can somebody tell me how many marks i will get out of four for the questions regarding why a cut in benefits may increase unemployment.

    I drew a graph with AD and AS. I then shifted AD left and said government spending is a component of AD, spending less on benefits means government expenditure falls so AD shifts left, resulting in a fall in output and hence fall in employment. And said also cause of less output means less firms so more people out of work.
    Thanks!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Yousf)
    Can somebody tell me how many marks i will get out of four for the questions regarding why a cut in benefits may increase unemployment.

    I drew a graph with AD and AS. I then shifted AD left and said government spending is a component of AD, spending less on benefits means government expenditure falls so AD shifts left, resulting in a fall in output and hence fall in employment. And said also cause of less output means less firms so more people out of work.
    Thanks!
    U kinda missed the point. U had to say how unemployed would have less disposable income. For your sake I hope you'll still get some marks
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Berke0)
    U kinda missed the point. U had to say how unemployed would have less disposable income. For your sake I hope you'll still get some marks
    You didn't have to talk about less disposable income if there's less benefits, you could have just talked about less government expenditure leading to unemployment.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Yousf)
    You didn't have to talk about less disposable income if there's less benefits, you could have just talked about less government expenditure leading to unemployment.
    If you "could" have done that why u even posting Yusuf?

    A graph with that much explanation if you "could" do that would likely get you 4 marks. Think for yourself bit
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Berke0)
    If you "could" have done that why u even posting Yusuf?

    A graph with that much explanation if you "could" do that would likely get you 4 marks. Think for yourself bit
    I wanted to know how many marks i would get because i wasn't sure if i would get all the marks if i included a diagram as the question didn't really want one, and i'm just saying you could have because you gave an alternative approach to the question hence the reason i said you 'could' have also. Don't bother replying because you don't know what your on about mate, cheers.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Yousf)
    I wanted to know how many marks i would get because i wasn't sure if i would get all the marks if i included a diagram as the question didn't really want one, and i'm just saying you could have because you gave an alternative approach to the question hence the reason i said you 'could' have also. Don't bother replying because you don't know what your on about mate, cheers.
    U got it wrong pal. Stop clutching at straws and revise ur global
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Berke0)
    U got it wrong pal. Stop clutching at straws and revise ur global
    Your bored Berke...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jakei1234)
    Your bored Berke...
    Who was speaking to you ?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Yousf)
    You didn't have to talk about less disposable income if there's less benefits, you could have just talked about less government expenditure leading to unemployment.
    Benefits is not part of government spending at all
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pato1)
    Benefits is not part of government spending at all
    It is unemployment related benefits like job seekers allowance
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Berke0)
    Who was speaking to you ?
    Don't go around being a prick, idiot.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Yousf)
    It is unemployment related benefits like job seekers allowance
    from textbook pg 83:

    'Government spending is spending by the central government and local government on, for example, education, health care and the police service. It does not include transfer payments such as housing benefit, JSA and state pensions.'
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Pato1)
    from textbook pg 83:

    'Government spending is spending by the central government and local government on, for example, education, health care and the police service. It does not include transfer payments such as housing benefit, JSA and state pensions.'
    Oh, but it doe say on the unofficial mark scheme that lower government spending on benefits will reduce g and so reduce aggregate demand leading to cyclical unmployment
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Yousf)
    Oh, but it doe say on the unofficial mark scheme that lower government spending on benefits will reduce g and so reduce aggregate demand leading to cyclical unmployment
    You can definitely say what you said! Government spending is a component of AD (AD=C+I+G+(X-m)) thus a reduction in government spending (or any fall in the components of AD) would lead to a fall in AD (shift to the left). Hence forth leading to a fall in output produced by firms in the market, leading to less workers needed by firms. Thus leading to demand-deficient or cyclical unemployment!
    So you'd definitely get full marks if that was your chain of reasoning!
    Hope this helps!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    F584 notes anyone??


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    hi, does anyone have time to look at my f582 paper (I re-wrote it) and give me a raw mark as guided by the unofficial mark scheme please? I've marked it myself but would also like at least one other person's opinion to be more certain
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lagoon)
    hi, does anyone have time to look at my f582 paper (I re-wrote it) and give me a raw mark as guided by the unofficial mark scheme please? I've marked it myself but would also like at least one other person's opinion to be more certain
    yes
 
 
 
  • 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
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
  • 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.