Multiple Choice help (1 Viewer)

[oompaman]

Hey,

i was doing some practice papers and came across a few weird questions

1. What would be the likely effect of a rise in the proportion of school leavers going on to tertiary eduction rather than joining the labour force?
Answers say there would be a decrease in the labour force participation rate? but wouldn't there be an increase as the overall skill level of the workforce is increased?


2. What would be the likely impact on an economy if the government decreased quotas on imported textiles?

For these questions how do you know whether they are referring to a reduction in the quota as in allowing less imports or reduction in quota as in abolition of the quota?

3. What action could the RBA take to slow a rapid depreciation of the Au dollar?
I put buy Au dollars but answers say sell Au dollars

4. Which of the following groups of international organisations affect world trade?
a. OECD, OPEC and ASEAN
b. ASEAN, OPEC and ANZCERTA
c. WTO, IMF and World Bank
d. IMF, OPEC and ASEAN

the answers say its c? but how does IMF and World Bank affect world trade? Also do we need to know about OPEC?
and ANZCERTA is just CERTA right?

Thanks

 

[freeeeee]

For Question one, you have to talk about short term effects as the question is more tailored to a immediate response from the labour market.
If a higher proportion of school leavers go on to tertiary education then they are not classified as unemployed or employed, furthermore it will reduce the potential of the workforce, leading to the decrease of the participation rate. The long term effect is that it will increase the participation rate as workers get more educated, and hence will be more likely to be employed or unemployed and not discouraged (leading to hidden unemployment which is not included in government figures), this in turn will increase the participation rate.

For question 2: always remember qouta as being a amount, if they decrease the quota they are letting in a smaller amount of imports, which will encourage domestic producers to increase their factors of production and increase supply of products (domestic producers will therefore increase their proportion of the marktet), this will lead to a increase in price levels. Leading to inflation as domestic producers suffer from less competition.

For question 3: you are correct, if you buy Australian dollars (using gold reserves or stored amounts of foreign currency) you reduce the supply of $AUD in the financial market, this would slow a rapid depreciation of the Australian dollar. Furthermore the RBA can increase interest rates, and hence the demand of the $AUD will increase as investment and bank deposits in Australia will earn more interest (higher returns). Are you sure the question is right?

For Q4: the key word is international oragnisation, so B is obsiously wrong since CERTA is a bilateral agreement between AUS and NZ, I am pretty sure ASEAN does not directly affect trade.
If you read mnore deeply into IMF, you will see that when countries cannot meet financial obligations to other countries the IMF makes then undergo structural change and contractionary macro-economic policies ---> this includes reducing protection and operating more liberalised trade regimes (therefore having a major effect on World Trade). The World Bank is the largest source of developmental assistance for developing economies, in a way it has a indirect but substantial influence on World Trade, The World Bank lends them money to develop their agricultural/manufacturing base therefore promoting World Trade.

Hope this helps

 

[oompaman]

For Question one, you have to talk about short term effects as the question is more tailored to a immediate response from the labour market.
If a higher proportion of school leavers go on to tertiary education then they are not classified as unemployed or employed, furthermore it will reduce the potential of the workforce, leading to the decrease of the participation rate. The long term effect is that it will increase the participation rate as workers get more educated, and hence will be more likely to be employed or unemployed and not discouraged (leading to hidden unemployment which is not included in government figures), this in turn will increase the participation rate.

For question 2: always remember qouta as being a amount, if they decrease the quota they are letting in a smaller amount of imports, which will encourage domestic producers to increase their factors of production and increase supply of products (domestic producers will therefore increase their proportion of the marktet), this will lead to a increase in price levels. Leading to inflation as domestic producers suffer from less competition.

For question 3: you are correct, if you buy Australian dollars (using gold reserves or stored amounts of foreign currency) you reduce the supply of $AUD in the financial market, this would slow a rapid depreciation of the Australian dollar. Furthermore the RBA can increase interest rates, and hence the demand of the $AUD will increase as investment and bank deposits in Australia will earn more interest (higher returns). Are you sure the question is right?

For Q4: the key word is international oragnisation, so B is obsiously wrong since CERTA is a bilateral agreement between AUS and NZ, I am pretty sure ASEAN does not directly affect trade.
If you read mnore deeply into IMF, you will see that when countries cannot meet financial obligations to other countries the IMF makes then undergo structural change and contractionary macro-economic policies ---> this includes reducing protection and operating more liberalised trade regimes (therefore having a major effect on World Trade). The World Bank is the largest source of developmental assistance for developing economies, in a way it has a indirect but substantial influence on World Trade, The World Bank lends them money to develop their agricultural/manufacturing base therefore promoting World Trade.

Hope this helps

Thanks
But for question 2 the answers say: The market share of domestic producers would fall and textile prices in the domestic market would rise <-- im going to assume its wrong



Also i'm pretty sure the question is wrong but:

Which of the following groups of countries has benefited the most from increasing globalisation
a. Low income countries
b. Middle income countries
c. Emerging economies
d. High income countries

Answers say its d. but i think its c.

Thanks

 

[Blocy]

But for question 2 the answers say: The market share of domestic producers would fall and textile prices in the domestic market would rise <-- im going to assume its wrong

Thanks

The first part of the answer is wrong, as the market share of domestic producers increases as the quota decreases (less competition), however the second part of the answer is right, generally prices will go up as there are less imported textiles (which are generally produced more efficiently overseas), allowing for domestic markets to increase prices (as there is a decrease in supply).

The answer to that question should be C, you only need to look at the effects of globalisation in trade/FDI infows/TNCs on China, India; and to a lesser extent but still a viable example, Indonesia and Brazil. Although D could also be correct, the impact is lesser (contrast to China's ~11% growth rates back in 2005-7, averaging 9% up to 2011).

 

[freeeeee]

Well from that MC Q the answer is A: From 2002 ECO HSC,
According to the logic that the Quota is an amount gives you the correct answer ---> if quota increases (i.e the amount of imports increases) the price will drop.
Because from textbook definition implementing a quota will increase prices for consumers becauses it reduces supply of imports. The above can be seen as opposite.

Nah globalisation has benefited high income countries more the answer is D

 

[kwu1]

View attachment 26649

Well from that MC Q the answer is A: From 2002 ECO HSC,
According to the logic that the Quota is an amount gives you the correct answer ---> if quota increases (i.e the amount of imports increases) the price will drop.
Because from textbook definition implementing a quota will increase prices for consumers becauses it reduces supply of imports. The above can be seen as opposite.

Nah globalisation has benefited high income countries more the answer is D

This is correct

 

[Blocy]

oh sorry for the misinformation ):

 

[freeeeee]

This is another quota MC question from the 2006 HSC paper to help you if you still have not understand:

1. From the Q it is easy to tell when Supply moves to the left the price is increasing. Following the logic that Quota = the amount of imports If the quota decreases (meaning less amount of imports) the prices will go up --> answer is D

 

[freeeeee]

The first part of the answer is wrong, as the market share of domestic producers increases as the quota decreases (less competition), however the second part of the answer is right, generally prices will go up as there are less imported textiles (which are generally produced more efficiently overseas), allowing for domestic markets to increase prices (as there is a decrease in supply).


The answer to that question should be C, you only need to look at the effects of globalisation in trade/FDI infows/TNCs on China, India; and to a lesser extent but still a viable example, Indonesia and Brazil. Although D could also be correct, the impact is lesser (contrast to China's ~11% growth rates back in 2005-7, averaging 9% up to 2011).

Yeh your explanation for the qouta is correct second part is right first part is wrong,
i remember doing that globalisation MC benefiting Q and i thought Emerging economy also, but if you look a little deeper in your textbook it will say globalisation benefits High income countries more

 

[oompaman]

Yeh your explanation for the qouta is correct second part is right first part is wrong,
i remember doing that globalisation MC benefiting Q and i thought Emerging economy also, but if you look a little deeper in your textbook it will say globalisation benefits High income countries more

Thanks
I understand the quota one now.

For the impact of globalisation which textbook has that globalisation benefits high income countries more(looks like i need to reread lol)

 

[freeeeee]

I cant remember anymore lol which section or textbook (ill try find it for you)

Just some food for thought though: High income country's own TNCs and already have the expertise, entrepreneurial culture and skills, availability of capital and finance to exploit the process of globalisation. The WTO (an international organisation that has supported globalisation) has been critised of favouring high income economies more because they have more impact on policies, can dispute or lodge appeals more readily (because they are BOSS lol, nah cos they have the funds to do so).

That MC is dodgy anyways, i think they would probably accept both answers (this has happened before in HSC exams)

 

[freeeeee]

Oo just read a section of the Dixon txtbook that says IMF (another influential and important organisation) "The major criticism of the IMF is that the 'structural adjustment' policies it advocates serve the interests of rich countries."