Search results

I'm going for one in Economics. Doubt I can get it... Pity I think I didn't do as well as I could.

You know what... Stop discussing this. Lets just all wait for the answer.

1) The increase in prices referred in the question was not directed to NAIRU. It was attributed to the increase in aggregate demand, which could've been any reason. 2) I never suggested setting up an unemployment rate. The unemployment rate is what it is. Unemployed/Labour force. Just because...

Hmm. Is this based on externals only? I can't remember how they determine this.

1) If you agree that cost push is not the only contributor to inflation during growth, then there is no contradiction in rising unemployment and rising inflation as of option A. 2) I strong object to the notion that if unemployment is not measured, it did not happen. Even if that is the case...

He sat it. He's accelerated.

Well.. Luckily you're not the one marking. :lol:

Lol. Just wait for the answer. P.S. (A)

Lol don't be surprised. I think they've done it a couple of times, for other subjects etc. P.S on frictional point. There are about as many hidden unemployed as those officially unemployed, if not more. So unless frictional accounts for 10% or more of official unemployed (which I highly doubt)...

Then they wouldn't be structurally unemployed in the first place if they can do work. Remember structural unemployment means that skills of a person could not fit into available jobs. And what a claim to say only no-skills work will increase in times of growth. Especially in Australia where...

Even if 10% of hidden unemployed seeks jobs, that would already offset more than enough frictional.

Of course there won't be hard feelings :). Anyway regarding your frictional case. Australia has an estimated 1.3 million hidden unemployed individuals. Would suspect that outnumbers frictional many times. Read my reply to matthew's case. I reckon most of it is wishful thinking.

Right... so a Law firm hires a plumber to be a lawyer... and since he is not productive like that, inflation. Sorry but no.

Australia is not under its NAIRU. It has been admitted that the NAIRU has be mis-estimated. There are many causes of inflation due to economic growth. Cost-push due to labour costs is just one of them. eg Economic growth is at 10%, no rise in participation rate or productivity can be enough to...

But seeing how Australia's underutilisation rate is around 10%, I say there are damn a lot more discouraged job seekers than frictional workers. Frictional unemployed guys are never long term unemployed. They will lose a job, find a job constantly, hence frictional, not structural or long term...

Yea we love it. Theres nothing else that requires our attention like this in the test.

I think otherwise. The NAIRU and rising participation rates are much more in the syllabus than short/long $#@#@ Philips curve nonsense. The syllabus doesn't even mention philips curve.

No. I bought them but never opened them. What a waste.

Just wait for the answer. People would recognise a rise in aggregate demand pretty quickly. You can't argue that hidden unemployment is slower than firms employing structurally unable, hard core and seasonal folks.

Well you will only be disadvantaged in stuff like facilities, experience and atmosphere etc.