Section I - Multiple Choice (1 Viewer)

[La Bomba]

for year 2, you were supposed to do 130/150 to calculate real gdp for year 2. not 100/150.

 

[RaMaNa]

mataa.. okkk the formulaa to calculate real gdp is Nominal GDP x 100/CPI. okay now listen carefully. 100 is the base year, generally you are given year 1 and year 2. okay. year 1 is 100. hence year 2 was the first year in this case, so to calculate real gdp. it is 130/150 x nominal gdp, which indicates an increase in real gdp. the person who confirmed this was someone who got 99% in the trial. he said it was designed to trick people, he is expected to come close to the top of the state. so ramana bro. c is wrong mate

geeezz. damn thats dumb. choosing c. lmao

for year 2, you were supposed to do 130/150 to calculate real gdp for year 2. not 100/150.

lmaooo no u werent LOL
its for the table year 1 , statistics were nom gdp 6000 and cpi 130.....
u divide 6000 by 130, then multiply by 100!!!
and u get 4615!!!
year 2 gdp was 6800,cpi 150.
6800 divided 150 times 100!!
and u get 4533.
u idiot, do u even know how 2 use the formula??

 

[AnandDNA]

someone explain why 19 is A and not B

 

[M@ster P]

ya 12 was C and 19 was A

yup cause if u aint seeking employment u aint unemployed, thus labour force and unemployment decreases.

By the looks of it i got 17/20 so pretty good

Labour force = Unemployed + employed

 

[RaMaNa]

yup cause if u aint seeking employment u aint unemployed, thus labour force and unemployment decreases.

By the looks of it i got 17/20 so pretty good

Labour force = Unemployed + employed

shit i put A, but isnt it employed people that r retrenching from their job??
so i think it might be B :S

 

[AnandDNA]

yup cause if u aint seeking employment u aint unemployed, thus labour force and unemployment decreases.

By the looks of it i got 17/20 so pretty good

Labour force = Unemployed + employed

Labour force decreases but unemployed doesnt change cause the people retrenched are not actively seeking work and thus not in the unemployment figure. Hence unemployed stays same but labour force decreases

Unemployment rate= unemployed/labour force henceeeeeee unemployment rate would increase.

like 1/2 > 1/3

Thats what i rkn

 

[RaMaNa]

yup cause if u aint seeking employment u aint unemployed, thus labour force and unemployment decreases.

By the looks of it i got 17/20 so pretty good

Labour force = Unemployed + employed

Labour force decreases but unemployed doesnt change cause the people retrenched are not actively seeking work and thus not in the unemployment figure. Hence unemployed stays same but labour force decreases

Unemployment rate= unemployed/labour force henceeeeeee unemployment rate would increase.

like 1/2 > 1/3

Thats what i rkn

isnt it employed ppl who r leaving?? cause it goes "if people retrenched from their jobs did not actively seek employment"
doesnt that mean employed r leaving?? so unemployment would increase, as the number of unemployed remains same, but labour force decreases. therefore as a percentage, the rate of unemployed would b higher.

 

[M@ster P]

isnt it employed ppl who r leaving?? cause it goes "if people retrenched from their jobs did not actively seek employment"
doesnt that mean employed r leaving?? so unemployment would increase, as the number of unemployed remains same, but labour force decreases. therefore as a percentage, the rate of unemployed would b higher.

lmao I dont know what retrenched even means

Edit: It just means somewhat got fired

I think its a because:

Labour force = Unemployed + employed, and the question asks what happens if retrenched people did not actively seek employment, the very fact the question says this means that they are not included in unemployment figures as they are not actively seeking work.

The definition of unemployed is someone who doesnt have a job but is actively seeking work


Ignore my poor explanation lol
Since labour force = unemployed + employed, it is a

 

[setonusyd]

Lol idiots stop having a pointless argument in 12 the answer is c no matter wheter you use CPI base as 100 or 130.

The one that stumped me was 20... I wasn't sure whether to put a or d and chose d in the end... Most put a but my teacher thinks it's d.

 

[AnandDNA]

isnt it employed ppl who r leaving?? cause it goes "if people retrenched from their jobs did not actively seek employment"
doesnt that mean employed r leaving?? so unemployment would increase, as the number of unemployed remains same, but labour force decreases. therefore as a percentage, the rate of unemployed would b higher.

Thats pretty much what i was saying. i.e 19 is B unemployment rate would be higher

 

[madsam]

12 i got a, gdp increased, but who knows

and q19

Lets say you have a labour force of 100 people, 50 are employed and 50 are unemployed so you have a 50% unemployment

Then 10 people from the employed group are retrenched, and no longer seek work, so the labour force drops to 90 people, 40 are employed and 50 are unemployed, and you have 56% unemployment

ergo the labour force shrinks and the unemployment rate will be higher, B

Make sense?

 

[Justin123456789]

what did people put for q15 and q17?

 

[k150764]

does anybody have the 100% correct MC answers?

 

[absorber]

umm dude, it was c.

.
1-A
2-b
3-c
4-b
5-A
6-D (but I'm pretty sure I put B =\ )
7-C
8-A
9-A
10-C?
11-C
12-C
13-D
14-A
15-c
16-A or B (I put B, but I've had a mind blank, can't remember what equilibrium level of income is)
17-a
18-D
19-B (But I put A)
20-A?

As far as I can tell those are the right answers, feel free to dispute though.

 

[DMT92]

CAN SOMEONE TELL ME WHAT I GOT OUT OF 20
my answers are:
a
d
c
b
a
d
c
a
a
d
b
c
d
a
c
b
a
d
a
a
Thanks in advance. congrats guys.... we did it!!!

 

[k150764]

.

17-a

15-c

isn't 15-A?
Im sure i was it somewhere in the text book tat when government borrows it puts upward pressure on interest rates causing crowding out effect

 

[madsam]

dmt, i think about 16/20, give or take, at least at least 3 wrong, and im pretty sure another is

 

[DMT92]

wouldnt the answer to 19 be A. because those who would have contributed to the unemployment rate, in fact did not and removed themselves from the labour force. thus ensuring a lower unemployment rate??? can someone clarify this for me.

 

[jkdsfsio3458963]

isn't 15-A?
Im sure i was it somewhere in the text book tat when government borrows it puts upward pressure on interest rates causing crowding out effect

That theory has been disproved, it no longer applies in the highly deregulated global market of today. Gittens did an article on it.

 

[jkdsfsio3458963]

+ the crowding out effect involved public sector borrowing, not borrowing from o/s