Section I: Multiple Choice (2 Viewers)

[Terlob]

7 = A. But lets not talk about this.

Why did you post then. Im sure everyone here knows your opinion by now

 

[runnable]

Why did you post then. Im sure everyone here knows your opinion by now

Same reason as you posting.

 

[ronash]

Why did you post then. Im sure everyone here knows your opinion by now

agreed.

over 11 pages of forum illustrating this

 

[runnable]

This forum is for discussion.

Its not as if we are trolling.

 

[Terlob]

This forum is for discussion.

Its not as if we are trolling.

But you're being an arrogant wanker. Apart from your first few posts you havn't added anything to the discussion, just tried to make yourself look smarter than the rest of us.

 

[runnable]

But you're being an arrogant wanker. Apart from your first few posts you havn't added anything to the discussion, just tried to make yourself look smarter than the rest of us.

I'm was pointing out whats right and whats wrong and discuss. Unless someone proves me wrong, its not as if what I said was invalid. You calling me an arrogant wanker just shows that you've ran out of logical things to say. So thanks.

 

[ronash]

7 = A. But lets not talk about this. Wait for the official answer.

you have been pwned and it has been comprehensively proven true that C is the answer yet you still insist that "7 = A"

and its not only on this thread either, you have realised the fallacies in your arguement in the question 7 thread as well, claiming that you will be right come january.
but its your opinion so thats ok.

 

[ronash]

But you're being an arrogant wanker. Apart from your first few posts you havn't added anything to the discussion, just tried to make yourself look smarter than the rest of us.

agreed once again

 

[runnable]

you have been pwned and it has been comprehensively proven true that C is the answer yet you still insist that "7 = A"

and its not only on this thread either, you have realised the fallacies in your arguement in the question 7 thread as well, claiming that you will be right come january.
but its your opinion so thats ok.

Proven by who? Who knows the 100% right answer and told us? Proven by you?

 

[JJmn]

But you're being an arrogant wanker. Apart from your first few posts you havn't added anything to the discussion, just tried to make yourself look smarter than the rest of us.

 

[ronash]

Proven by who? Who knows the 100% right answer and told us? Proven by you?

wrong word...more like general consensus

 

[runnable]

wrong word...more like general consensus

Well quite obviously general consensus is not nearly always right. Whats more, its hardly a general consensus here.

 

[Rix123]

7 is definately C - how can u think its A - its soooo easy!!!!

first unemployment can go below NAIRU - non accelerating rate of inflation. therefore unemployment below NAIRU adds to inflation and obviously if its below NAIRU then unemployment has gone down initially (the q says initially) and therefore if its below NAIRU it will cause INFLATION.

With 8 - did anyone get D? not coz its the right answer but because none of the other ones were because:

decentralised -
imporves labour mobility
increases inequality
increases inflationary pressures as government can't fix wages below or to inflation and so relies on market forces.

decentralised usually increases wages so therefore reduces international competitiveness

Does anyone agree or see the logic?

 

[Garygaz]

7 is definately C - how can u think its A - its soooo easy!!!!

first unemployment can go below NAIRU - non accelerating rate of inflation. therefore unemployment below NAIRU adds to inflation and obviously if its below NAIRU then unemployment has gone down initially (the q says initially) and therefore if its below NAIRU it will cause INFLATION.

With 8 - did anyone get D? not coz its the right answer but because none of the other ones were because:

decentralised -
imporves labour mobility
increases inequality
increases inflationary pressures as government can't fix wages below or to inflation and so relies on market forces.

decentralised usually increases wages so therefore reduces international competitiveness

Does anyone agree or see the logic?

Nah man, when you move to a decentralised system, there is less government intervention hence less protection for workers, wages fall.

Also with question 7, as there is more aggregate demand, that pretty much means eco growth, which means hidden unemployed rejoin the workforce and initially add to the unemployment rate. Though it's a stupid question, both answers can be argued.

 

[ronash]

Nah man, when you move to a decentralised system, there is less government intervention hence less protection for workers, wages fall.

Also with question 7, as there is more aggregate demand, that pretty much means eco growth, which means hidden unemployed rejoin the workforce and initially add to the unemployment rate. Though it's a stupid question, both answers can be argued.

but thats the thing!!!!

hidden unemployment does not immediately reduce as soon as there is an increase in aggregate demand so you cannot argue that it initially adds to the unemployment rate

 

[runnable]

but thats the thing!!!!

hidden unemployment does not immediately reduce as soon as there is an increase in aggregate demand so you cannot argue that it initially adds to the unemployment rate

It does immediately reduce hidden unemployment. Day 1: Oh its good growth now. Day 2: Lets go look for a job.

 

[Garygaz]

but thats the thing!!!!

hidden unemployment does not immediately reduce as soon as there is an increase in aggregate demand so you cannot argue that it initially adds to the unemployment rate

Eh, i shouldn't be doing this i've got ext 1 tomorrow but anywhooz.

At NAIRU, there is still frictional, seasonal, structural, and hardcore unemployment, as well as hidden.

When there is eco growth:

Frictional unemployed don't get employed quicker as it is addressed by better employment agencies.

Seasonal unemployment doesn't reduce for obvious reasons.

Structural unemployed don't get employed as they have the wrong skills, you can't get someone who was a car-manufacturer to work in say finance.

Hardcore... well yea, not getting a job from eco growth.

So as there is growth, initially the hidden unemployed, who might very well have the skills necessary to fill these new jobs, enter the workforce, initially driving up unemployment.

 

[Dimplez]

You articulated why I said A really well Garygaz

 

[Garygaz]

You articulated why I said A really well Garygaz

 

[Davadale]

Well quite obviously general consensus is not nearly always right. Whats more, its hardly a general consensus here.

gut yaself ya onkgrah