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

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Schmuckle)
    OK. If there are 4 worms on a hook and 1 is replaced with every cast, and a cast is made 12 times an hour, then there must be 4+11= 15 worms used in one hour.

    An hour is spent at the first 4 pools, and all worms are discarded between pools, so 4*15 = 60 worms are used on the first 4 pools.

    On the last pool there are 18 casts so 17+4 worms = 21 worms.

    21+60 = 81 worms

    If you think about it logically, it makes sense that if you start with 4 worms and cast 12 times, you'll only need 11 additional worms.
    thank you- but i dont understand the 17+4, why 17?..
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I've never studied Philosophy or Economics and had only a little Politics in the last years in school but am applying for PPE.
    Oxford says that I don't need any background regarding these subjects but only have a strong interest. Ok, and Maths and History would be helpful.

    I won't be able to do an economical etc evalutation of a thesis and give various examples like some of you do to support my argument.

    I am probably not the only one who has never studied P or P or E.

    So, I guess, it is more important to have a very good structure and a well-supported conclusion rather than to know everything.
    To have both together won't cause any harm, though. ;-)
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Meliae)
    Does anyone know whether the questions for EP/PPP are different to those for E&M/PPE? I know last year that the TSA was given at interview and the EP questions were all psychology based but will it be the same this year? It says on the TSA website the questions aren't subject specific and on the Oxford website it doesn't say anything about that as far as I can see.
    oh sugar...i've been practising normal tsa essay questions!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mcl)
    hahaha oh right ok!!
    i did wonder ...

    well thanks alot i feel much more confident now, atleast i know it was right what i wrote

    thank you!!
    Of course, make sure you're as precise as possible in the exam else it can undermine the argument. On the whole, the foundations were correct but due to typos and waffly sections, it makes it seem less accurate. If you get what I mean?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clements-)
    I have a feeling the guy is confusing free markets with the idea of a perfect market. Secondly, a monopoly is a completely realistic side effect of a free market, especially if they have some sort of competitive edge for whatever reason. A monopoly is not always a single seller (that's a pure monopoly) and can often be those with a largely dominant share of the market. His second point further leads me to conclude that he has completely confused free market with perfect markets. There is supposed to be low barriers to entry but free markets don't automatically run as smoothly as you seem to imply. And I say this coming from a view that wholly supports free markets. Therefore, please ignore everything he's said.
    I am not confusing free markets with perfect competition. Monopolies can only exist on a very small and local scale, not to the point where wages are being controlled as the essay had suggested. As for companies with a competitive edge, They cannot restrict competition by raising prices and decreasing wages. this is just patently absurd.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by amy123123)
    oh sugar...i've been practising normal tsa essay questions!
    Don't worry, I haven't practiced any yet.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Chill out guys and good luck to everyone.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by amy123123)
    thank you- but i dont understand the 17+4, why 17?..
    The same reason there were 11 before. The 17 is for the replacement worms. You don't need a replacement for the first cast, just the other 17.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I haven't practised ANY essays... I'm not sure how much practising them would help tbh because there's no way of marking it.

    I have a couple question about the test
    - in the essay section, is it good to use lots of quotations/examples, or will that just look like you're trying to show off your knowledge without having a detailed understanding? In economics questions, will any quantitative working be desirable? Equations/diagrams etc?

    - Also, is it split into two separate papers? Like you get given section 1 for 90 minutes, then it gets taken off you, then you get sec 2? I know I'd love to do section 2 first... get it out of the way and give you some time to go back over it if you finish the multi-choice with spare time.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by xerriva)
    I am not confusing free markets with perfect competition. Monopolies can only exist on a very small and local scale, not to the point where wages are being controlled as the essay had suggested. As for companies with a competitive edge, They cannot restrict competition by raising prices and decreasing wages. this is just patently absurd.
    In a completely free market of course a huge monopoly can occur. Don't be ridiculous. In the real world where there is market failure, a firm that has say 50% of the market share would buy up lots of the small competitors, taking their market share. As the size of this firm increases, so does their capacity to buy more market share. Eventually it is not only absolutely conceivable but also almost probable that a monopoly would grow to such an extent that it would control nearly all of the market. Smaller firms would then not be able to compete because of the huge economies of scale that the monopoly would be experiencing, on top of the fact that they would engage in predatory pricing which would render the smaller firms helpless. These would all contribute to massive barriers to entry for competition, meaning that actually the OP was right in their original essay on this matter.
    For all the ridiculing, it's this guy that seems to be the one making the stupid assertions. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Oh and also, do we get a mark back? Or does it just go to the university?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Schmuckle)
    I haven't practised ANY essays... I'm not sure how much practising them would help tbh because there's no way of marking it.

    I have a couple question about the test
    - in the essay section, is it good to use lots of quotations/examples, or will that just look like you're trying to show off your knowledge without having a detailed understanding? In economics questions, will any quantitative working be desirable? Equations/diagrams etc?

    - Also, is it split into two separate papers? Like you get given section 1 for 90 minutes, then it gets taken off you, then you get sec 2? I know I'd love to do section 2 first... get it out of the way and give you some time to go back over it if you finish the multi-choice with spare time.
    I, like you, haven't done any practise essays, as I don't think they'd help.

    Idk about quotes etc, just try and make sure the essay doesn't sound contrived.

    And you get 90 minutes for the multiple choice (one paper), then that gets taken away, and you get given the second paper - the essay, and you're given 30 mins for this.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kneechuh)
    you're looking for a prime number that ends with the first digit of a square number.
    11 (prime) and 16 (square) are the only two which fit this condition.
    It could also be 13(prime) and 36 (square), either way 6 is your number.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Sugar!!! jus realised that there was a thread on Oxford TSA... :eek:

    Anyway, why's everyone else's essay seems way better than mine???

    Hopefully multiple choice will put me in a good stead...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Merk that Sike of a Mike)
    In a completely free market of course a huge monopoly can occur. Don't be ridiculous. In the real world where there is market failure, a firm that has say 50% of the market share would buy up lots of the small competitors, taking their market share. As the size of this firm increases, so does their capacity to buy more market share. Eventually it is not only absolutely conceivable but also almost probable that a monopoly would grow to such an extent that it would control nearly all of the market. Smaller firms would then not be able to compete because of the huge economies of scale that the monopoly would be experiencing, on top of the fact that they would engage in predatory pricing which would render the smaller firms helpless. These would all contribute to massive barriers to entry for competition, meaning that actually the OP was right in their original essay on this matter.
    For all the ridiculing, it's this guy that seems to be the one making the stupid assertions. :rolleyes:

    The mechanics of how markets work has made you forget the affects of everything you just said as well as the original essay question. lets assume everything you said is true(which it isnt), then the innovation that comes from people setting up small companies is in limitless supply even though there is a "monopoly"...who cares who owns them as long as we cannot be exploited. which brings me to my second point: if the company predatory prices then prices of its goods will be as low as if there WAS competition all along. So please think a bit more before talking about stupid assertions.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Ok guys I did this essay in 15 mins, I would most definitely not do this question in the exam but I thought I'd give it a go since it's the one I had the least clue about


    In order to be a successful leader, is it better to be loved or feared?



    It is questionable what being a successful leader means precisely – someone who takes into account people’s views and feelings and bases his decisions on them, or one who disregards said views if necessary and takes the tough decisions required to take his organisation or country forward. A mixture of the two generally works best as the weaknesses of democracy are balanced with the strengths of an authoritarian leader.

    Being a loved leader contributes mainly to the democratic part of leadership. People are more likely to be persuaded by your views, happier to obey your commands and generally more likely to follow your examples. This is because with love comes respect and an esteemed leader has a higher chance of being listened to. Obeying someone you love will also generally make people happier than obeying someone they dislike which is good in terms of utilitarianism.

    However is being feared synonymous with being disliked? One can be feared but esteemed, respected, just like a loved leader. It can even be argued that people will get a larger satisfaction of getting approval from someone who they fear, rather than from someone they love.

    To achieve the balance between democracy and authoritarianism I mentioned above, it is best to be both loved and feared. This would overcome some of the weaknesses of being only loved, namely that your people may expect less of a punishment for disobeying and hence disobey more often. Also if a leader comes to a situation where they have to make a difficult choice which may cause short term pain but long term gain, it is possible that the people will lose their love for said leader and there will be nothing left to keep them in his fellowship. However if a leader is feared too, this situation will not occur.

    Overall, being loved and being feared both have their merits, but being feared will be more beneficial and lead to more success as the leader will have a tighter grasp on his people and a more solid stance in conflicts.






    Obv very rushed, but please provide feedback. I have an economics one as well, which I will post in a bit. (the economics one is a million times better lol)





    PS: To the person whose essay was labelled as pure ******** by someone else, to be fair I did spot a few slight errors in your economics analysis if you want I can explain them? (although I could be wrong and you could be right )
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Kneechuh)
    I, like you, haven't done any practise essays, as I don't think they'd help.

    Idk about quotes etc, just try and make sure the essay doesn't sound contrived.

    And you get 90 minutes for the multiple choice (one paper), then that gets taken away, and you get given the second paper - the essay, and you're given 30 mins for this.
    Ah, that's mildly annoying. OK.

    Do you know if we get the mark back? If so, how long does it take?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Schmuckle)
    Ah, that's mildly annoying. OK.

    Do you know if we get the mark back? If so, how long does it take?
    You don't get it back for ages. If you get an interview, clearly you can assume you've done ok and if you don't, well...

    Though, I seem to recall that you can def get your actual mark sometime in January from the Cambridge Assessment guys.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Clements-)
    I wrote out the names and then added amounts next to each one and subtracted the amounts from others. I ended up with one of them being up 4 and one being down 4, which led me to the answer that floyd pay 4 mil to national? i think that's what I did and can't remember if I was right or not....
    That's exactly wot i did!!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 09911041)
    I've never studied Philosophy or Economics and had only a little Politics in the last years in school but am applying for PPE.
    Oxford says that I don't need any background regarding these subjects but only have a strong interest. Ok, and Maths and History would be helpful.

    I won't be able to do an economical etc evalutation of a thesis and give various examples like some of you do to support my argument.

    I am probably not the only one who has never studied P or P or E.

    So, I guess, it is more important to have a very good structure and a well-supported conclusion rather than to know everything.
    To have both together won't cause any harm, though. ;-)


    I'm in the same boat as you. I haven't studied Economics before but have developed basic economics knowledge through reading. I, also could not do a detailed economical evaluation.

    Don't worry, We should be fine.
 
 
 
  • 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
    Brussels sprouts
  • 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.