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

AQA A-level Economics new 7136 - 06, 13 & 19 Jun 2017 [Exam Discussion] Watch

    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    For 15 marks I said about services being more elastic (was mentioned in the extracts), cheaper overseas and that higher skills & living standards in rich nations meant they don't work in manuf as much but I acknowledged that some manufacturing is high skill e.g. Space tech

    Anyone know if this is valid?



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mo501)
    For the 25 marker - I wrote about REASONS FOR intervention and REASONS AGAINST. I didn't really talk about which methods of intervention, because I felt that the question was asking for reasons not methods of intervention. Is this alright?
    As long as you alluded to methods of intervention where it was relevant then you're fine. Personally I talked about reasons for and against with specific methods of intervention and then in the conclusion talked about some methods being better than others. The point of the question is whether intervention is good, not how intervention works.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    For the 15 marker I spoke about the income elasticity for services so as we have higher growth and and incomes rise there's more demand for the service industry and labour is a derived demand etc and then also about how China has low wage labour whereas the U.K. doesn't and how that increases costs and the shift from labour to machinery causing unemployment

    and then for the 25 marker
    - Defined government intervention
    -Case for intervening - structural employment and consequences of this - Keynesian demand diagram
    - How to intervene with the 'reduced business rates and reduced carbon emission targets'
    - Evaluated this with government budget deficit and negative externalities from pollution plus negative externalities diagram
    - Case against - Sunset industry stuff about elongating the decline of the industry by protecting it uhh even if there is investment China and other countries may still have a comparative advantage
    - judgement - no shouldn't support it, just the natural development of the structural changes in the economy from manufacturing to service sector
    - But should use government intervention through supply side policies education & training to reduce structural unemployment
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    This is roughly what I did for the questions, did anyone else do something similar or think this sounds valid?

    10 marker
    Basically said that the manufacturing sector has declined but it isn't in decline then briefly talked about part 3 of extract C not being relevant as it only showed prices not quantity

    15 marker
    Talked about cheaper wages elsewhere leading to less demand in the UK for manufacturers
    Improvements in technology mean we don't require as many workers
    Income elasticity of demand being greater for services rather than goods

    25 marker
    Paragraph one:They could intervene by way of lower business rates until the UK regains a comparative advantage but countered saying that there will always be lower wage rates + time of austerity

    Paragraph two: Intervention through lax environmental laws means no direct impact to anyone+no cost. Countered talking about tragedy of the commons and risk of regulatory capture i.e every time costs rise they go to the government for help

    Paragraph three: Short term would see unemployment spike but long term cheaper prices and the increase in supply would mean firms need labour so more manufacturing jobs become available.

    Concluded saying that intervention shouldn't happen, also cited Thatcher and the coal mines saying that whilst unpopular it worked and this was on a larger scale (4 million unemployed vs 30,000)
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Anthony27)
    10 marker
    part 3 of extract C not being relevant as it only showed prices not quantity
    Well, it didn't show prices, it showed the balance of trade in goods (imports/exports and the balance). You could have used that to support a point about the UK manufacturing higher value goods (export value rose in the period, despite fall in output).
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    Was it relevant to talk about the issues relating to structural unemployment for the 25 marker, and the need for government intervention to help solve the issues relating to unemployment and the occupational immobility of labour in the economy? Because if not unemployment can have serious impacts on the economic performance if the government doesn't intervene to help this issue in the steel industry?
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Holdsworth1)
    Was it relevant to talk about the issues relating to structural unemployment for the 25 marker, and the need for government intervention to help solve the issues relating to unemployment and the occupational immobility of labour in the economy? Because if not unemployment can have serious impacts on the economic performance if the government doesn't intervene to help this issue in the steel industry?

    I spoke about this too ~
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Can anyone remember the wording of the 10 and 15 i want to ask my teacher about them but cant even remember what they exactly asked for?
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Anthony27)
    This is roughly what I did for the questions, did anyone else do something similar or think this sounds valid?

    10 marker
    Basically said that the manufacturing sector has declined but it isn't in decline then briefly talked about part 3 of extract C not being relevant as it only showed prices not quantity

    15 marker
    Talked about cheaper wages elsewhere leading to less demand in the UK for manufacturers
    Improvements in technology mean we don't require as many workers
    Income elasticity of demand being greater for services rather than goods

    25 marker
    Paragraph one:They could intervene by way of lower business rates until the UK regains a comparative advantage but countered saying that there will always be lower wage rates + time of austerity

    Paragraph two: Intervention through lax environmental laws means no direct impact to anyone+no cost. Countered talking about tragedy of the commons and risk of regulatory capture i.e every time costs rise they go to the government for help

    Paragraph three: Short term would see unemployment spike but long term cheaper prices and the increase in supply would mean firms need labour so more manufacturing jobs become available.

    Concluded saying that intervention shouldn't happen, also cited Thatcher and the coal mines saying that whilst unpopular it worked and this was on a larger scale (4 million unemployed vs 30,000)
    Talked about very similar points
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Harry9888)
    Can anyone remember the wording of the 10 and 15 i want to ask my teacher about them but cant even remember what they exactly asked for?
    10 marker: To what extent if at all is UK manufacturing in decline
    15: Explain why advanced economies experiencing economic growth will see employment in manufacturing fall and employment in services rise.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MB98Yeezy)
    For 15 marks I said about services being more elastic (was mentioned in the extracts), cheaper overseas and that higher skills & living standards in rich nations meant they don't work in manuf as much but I acknowledged that some manufacturing is high skill e.g. Space tech

    Anyone know if this is valid?

    Wasn't services more income inelastic



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    wasnt services more income inelastic
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dinklebop)
    Well, it didn't show prices, it showed the balance of trade in goods (imports/exports and the balance). You could have used that to support a point about the UK manufacturing higher value goods (export value rose in the period, despite fall in output).
    Yeah, I used that extract to say it shows more that there may have been a change in the nature of the products we export as opposed to the quantity. Basically a move from low skilled manufacturing to higher skilled
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    For the 15 mark question did anyone else talk about a PPF for goods and services?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I said inelastic services also helped with terms of trade, is that even at all relevant or? Pretty sure I subconsciously wrote that


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mo501)
    For the 25 marker - I wrote about REASONS FOR intervention and REASONS AGAINST. I didn't really talk about which methods of intervention, because I felt that the question was asking for reasons not methods of intervention. Is this alright?

    Yeah that's fine, I spoke to my teacher after and either is okay as long as you included some evaluation maybe about possible policies which could be used in intervention e.g. Intervention to prevent structural unemployment could be a subsidy so they can afford to continue running the loss making business. Then maybe eval that saying this is very expensive and it may lead to X inefficiency so it could be better to use SSP like technical colleges to ease the impact of structural unemployment in allowing the industry to collapse and reduce occupational immobility maybe. But yeah in short that's fine cause it's actually answering the question.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by junky27)
    Anyone remember any of their mcqs
    Don't remember the questions but remember some answers
    126
    46.5 or something
    Real wage unemployment
    For the value judgment it was the choice with politics in it
    Lras out due to productivity
    Inflation one was fall in real income
    2000-3000
    Anyone know the bond yield?
    Fall in mortgages rates for the brick one as labour derived d
    Max price for bulbs
    Mrpl= revenue gained from extra unit sold produced by worker
    +12 for the last one
    Reduction in illiteracy for hdi
    Reduction in inequality for gini
    Offline

    5
    ReputationRep:
    What did people put marginal product labour
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    The tax is £5000.
    The one regarding marginal propensity to consume, I believe, is 37.5mn/bn.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Remaine)
    The tax is £5000.
    The one regarding marginal propensity to consume, I believe, is 37.5mn/bn.
    47.5?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Remaine)
    The tax is £5000.
    The one regarding marginal propensity to consume, I believe, is 37.5mn/bn.
    I knew the tax wasn't 12000 so I managed to remove the choice which most people would go for.
    But when I tried to do the calculations, I wasn't getting any of those answers.

    Do you remember if one of the choices was 5500? If so I think i went for that one. If not then i probably went for 5000
 
 
 
  • 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 newspaper do you read/prefer?
  • 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.