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

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hello,

    Could someone please go through this question for me to make sure everythings right.

    Given that:

    Consumption
    C= 400+0.7Y
    Savings
    S= -400+0.2Y
    Taxation
    T= 0.1Y
    Imports
    Z= 200+0.1Y
    Investment
    I= 1200
    Government Spending
    G= 500
    Exports
    X=1300

    Calculate the multiplier (k). Using k, calculate the new equilibrium level of output, when exports increase by 400 from X= 1300 to X= 1700. Confirm the new equilibrium level of output using the withdrawls - injections approach.

    AD = C+I+G+X-Z

    400+0.7Y+1200+500+1700-(200+0.1Y)

    Equalibrium when W=J, where W= S+T+Z and J= I+G+X

    W=-400+0.2Y+0.1Y+200+0.1Y= -200+0.4Y
    J=1200+500+1300= 3000

    Equilibrium when: -200+0.4Y=3000
    Y1=8000 where Y1= Inital Equilibrium

    K= 1/MPW = 1/(MPS+MPT+MPZ)
    = 1(0.2+0.1+0.1) = 1/0.4 = 2.5
    K= ΔY/ΔJ= ΔY/ΔX
    i.e ΔY=K x ΔX

    ΔY = 2.5 x 400 = 1000

    New equilibrium = Y1 + ΔY = 8000 + 1000 = 9,000

    So, Y* increases by 8000 from 1000 to 9000?


    Thanks
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    increased Y of 8000 when X increase 400, that would be a multiplier of 20?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Which multiplier are we talking about?

    Fairly sure I could check this for you but just cant get my head around it laid out like this. Its been too long since I did these type of questions...

    So I cant check method but the maths looks sound.

    (Original post by MeAndBubbles)
    increased Y of 8000 when X increase 400, that would be a multiplier of 20?
    No.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anon2332)
    Hello,

    Could someone please go through this question for me to make sure everythings right.

    Given that:

    Consumption
    C= 400+0.7Y
    Savings
    S= -400+0.2Y
    Taxation
    T= 0.1Y
    Imports
    Z= 200+0.1Y
    Investment
    I= 1200
    Government Spending
    G= 500
    Exports
    X=1300

    Calculate the multiplier (k). Using k, calculate the new equilibrium level of output, when exports increase by 400 from X= 1300 to X= 1700. Confirm the new equilibrium level of output using the withdrawls - injections approach.

    AD = C+I+G+X-Z

    400+0.7Y+1200+500+1700-(200+0.1Y)

    Equalibrium when W=J, where W= S+T+Z and J= I+G+X

    W=-400+0.2Y+0.1Y+200+0.1Y= -200+0.4Y
    J=1200+500+1300= 3000

    Equilibrium when: -200+0.4Y=3000
    Y1=8000 where Y1= Inital Equilibrium

    K= 1/MPW = 1/(MPS+MPT+MPZ)
    = 1(0.2+0.1+0.1) = 1/0.4 = 2.5
    K= ΔY/ΔJ= ΔY/ΔX
    i.e ΔY=K x ΔX

    ΔY = 2.5 x 400 = 1000

    New equilibrium = Y1 + ΔY = 8000 + 1000 = 9,000

    So, Y* increases by 8000 from 1000 to 9000?


    Thanks

    K= 1/MPW = 1/(MPS+MPT+MPZ)


    Dude, where did you get that equation from? Feel that's the weak spot. If you need further help let me know.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chrrye)
    Which multiplier are we talking about?

    Fairly sure I could check this for you but just cant get my head around it laid out like this. Its been too long since I did these type of questions...

    So I cant check method but the maths looks sound.


    No.

    Well then you must admit the maths is dodgy as is your tutoring abilities.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MeAndBubbles)
    Well then you must admit the maths is dodgy as is your tutoring abilities.
    Not sure exactly what your trying to say,im not trying to tutor anyone.
    Before you criticise consider the following:



    (Original post by anon2332)
    K= 1/MPW = 1/(MPS+MPT+MPZ)
    = 1(0.2+0.1+0.1) = 1/0.4 = 2.5
    K= ΔY/ΔJ= ΔY/ΔX
    i.e ΔY=K x ΔX

    ΔY = 2.5 x 400 = 1000

    New equilibrium = Y1 + ΔY = 8000 + 1000 = 9,000

    So, Y* increases by 8000 from 1000 to 9000?
    Responding to that with this:
    (Original post by MeAndBubbles)
    increased Y of 8000 when X increase 400, that would be a multiplier of 20?
    Rather than seeing that :

    ΔY = 2.5 x 400 = 1000
    New equilibrium = Y1 + ΔY = 8000 + 1000 = 9,000
    Y1 = 8000
    ΔY = 1000
    So, Y* increases by 1000 from 8000 to 9000?


    Which is what the person was trying to say, is a strong sign of an idiot.
    They already worked 'K = 'the multiplier' ' out to be 0.25, how could it suddenly be 20?!

    What I was saying was that without knowing which multiplier (tax government spending etc) was being sort I could not check the theory.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chrrye)
    Not sure exactly what your trying to say,im not trying to tutor anyone.
    Before you criticise consider the following:




    Responding to that with this:


    Rather than seeing that :

    ΔY = 2.5 x 400 = 1000
    New equilibrium = Y1 + ΔY = 8000 + 1000 = 9,000
    Y1 = 8000
    ΔY = 1000
    So, Y* increases by 1000 from 8000 to 9000?


    Which is what the person was trying to say, is a strong sign of an idiot.
    They already worked 'K = 'the multiplier' ' out to be 0.25, how could it suddenly be 20?!

    What I was saying was that without knowing which multiplier (tax government spending etc) was being sort I could not check the theory.

    Ugh! Now you're saying he has made maths mistake. Changing tunes to fit the crime, dumb fellow.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MeAndBubbles)
    Ugh! Now you're saying he has made maths mistake. Changing tunes to fit the crime, dumb fellow.
    He probably just typed it up wrong tbh. Shame you couldnt see through that, but whatever.

    Yeah, maybe but Iv got a tune for you then, dumbass. Crime: idiocy.

    What exactly have you added to this thread? Nothing.
    Except this gem which, tbh, is still pretty funny:
    "increased Y of 8000 when X increase 400, that would be a multiplier of 20?"
    Was that first post of your meant as a joke? That would make you just not funny instead of stupid.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anon2332)
    K= 1/MPW = 1/(MPS+MPT+MPZ)
    k = \frac{1}{1-MPW}?

    sorry if thats not right (probs isnt) but ive only dealt with the keynesian multiplier with consumptions while G,X and M are taken as exogenous and I is a function of the interest rate which itself is a function of income and round and round we go
 
 
 
  • 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.