# Economics HSC Exam Predictions/Thoughts (1 Viewer)

#### sab13562

##### Well-Known Member
dude everyone did, don’t worry. i think they will give more than one answer to the question tbh, but i am very sure that the final answer is C.
Good to know. Yeah, I also think that more than one answer will be given.

#### notme123

##### Well-Known Member
B: local streets will build up because cars will be more free flowing on the tollway, creating traffic on local streets where traffic lights still exist.
B: removing traffic lights = more traffic on both the tollway and local streets. this is the easiest one to eliminate and cannot be true at all.
i dont get these explanations they dont make sense. i dont think theyre literally removing traffic lights, its a new highway created that removes the use of 24 traffic lights

for the first one yes existing traffic will still exist but i dont think it increases.
second one i dont know what you mean tbh

#### sab13562

##### Well-Known Member
i dont get these explanations they dont make sense. i dont think theyre literally removing traffic lights, its a new highway created that removes the use of 24 traffic lights
God now I'm lost . Im sticking to B at this point.

#### notme123

##### Well-Known Member
if you have 100 cars in total starting from point a, 50 want to get from point a to point b on the other side of 24 traffic lights, the other 50 need to use the traffic lights to move within town, the bypass will reduce the usage of traffic lights from 100 to 50 cars, creating less traffic in local streets.

whatever we cant change it now

#### zbolland

##### Active Member
i dont get these explanations they dont make sense. i dont think theyre literally removing traffic lights, its a new highway created that removes the use of 24 traffic lights

for the first one yes existing traffic will still exist but i dont think it increases.
second one i dont know what you mean tbh
ok then my second explanation is correct. so let's say the tollway removes the 24 sets of traffic lights and there is no longer a use for them.

as i am sure we can both agree, the tollway will make the roads more efficient for all users/cars.

A: more cars can access the tollway and use it due to the lack of congestion originally caused by traffic = more noise pollution since there will be an increased number of cars going through each day.

B: since the tollway has removed the traffic lights, what we will see is a higher level of traffic and congestion on streets beyond the tollway. think about it like this, if there are a bunch of cars on the tollway and they move onto 'local streets' (where traffic lights still exist), it will cause cars to backup on local streets and lead to more traffic.

D: tollway has replaced traffic lights = less congestion, less traffic because there is no more stop and start of cars (which happens with traffic lights). therefore travel times for users of the tollway decreases.

C is the only one left and i can explain again if necesary

#### sensored12

##### New Member
D: tollway has replaced traffic lights = less congestion, less traffic because there is no more stop and start of cars (which happens with traffic lights). therefore travel times for users of the tollway decreases.
By definition, an externality is unintended.

Decreased travel times is an intended consequence of removing traffic lights. The answer is therefore D no?

I also picked C, but D is the more logical answer IMO. Hopefully, they award two correct answers (as has been done in the past)

#### notme123

##### Well-Known Member
By definition, an externality is unintended.

Decreased travel times is an intended consequence of removing traffic lights. The answer is therefore D no?

I also picked C, but D is the more logical answer IMO. Hopefully, they award two correct answers (as has been done in the past)
ye the intended answer was d but everyone ive spoken to chose b or c.

##### Well-Known Member
ye the intended answer was d but everyone ive spoken to chose b or c.
aight bro who cares man

we gettit you guys are sweats and have a ton of free time

but i think there are other ways you can put your brains to use

for example try cooking

#### notme123

##### Well-Known Member
aight bro who cares man

we gettit you guys are sweats and have a ton of free time

but i think there are other ways you can put your brains to use

for example try cooking
actually i tried to learn japanese. maybe i should continue

#### zbolland

##### Active Member
By definition, an externality is unintended.

Decreased travel times is an intended consequence of removing traffic lights. The answer is therefore D no?

I also picked C, but D is the more logical answer IMO. Hopefully, they award two correct answers (as has been done in the past)
How do we know that deceased travel times is an intended consequence? For all we know, the only intended consequence of this decision was to cut the cost of traffic lights or something random like that. This is why the question is so subjective. You simply cannot tell what is the unintended and intended consequences of this decision as we don’t have enough information.

I think they will accept C or D, but the ‘most right’ answer is C, as it there is little to no reasonable explanation as to why house prices would rise and hence it’s neither an unintended or intended consequence - if anything, it’s not even a consequence.

I wouldn’t fret about it, though. I wouldn’t even be surprised if NESA allow for all four answers. We have approximately 12 days until our ATARs are out and all HSC Eco marking would have been completed by now.

Nothing we can do about it now other than prey to the NESA gods.

#### sensored12

##### New Member
How do we know that deceased travel times is an intended consequence? For all we know, the only intended consequence of this decision was to cut the cost of traffic lights or something random like that. This is why the question is so subjective. You simply cannot tell what is the unintended and intended consequences of this decision as we don’t have enough information.

I think they will accept C or D, but the ‘most right’ answer is C, as it there is little to no reasonable explanation as to why house prices would rise and hence it’s neither an unintended or intended consequence - if anything, it’s not even a consequence.

I wouldn’t fret about it, though. I wouldn’t even be surprised if NESA allow for all four answers. We have approximately 12 days until our ATARs are out and all HSC Eco marking would have been completed by now.

Nothing we can do about it now other than prey to the NESA gods.
It could be argued that by building a new tollway, greater noise and air pollution would make nearby land less attractive, decreasing its value (rather than increasing it), so C should be the correct answer.

But yeah, nothing can be done except pray to NESA... Best of luck for a state rank

#### notme123

##### Well-Known Member
How do we know that deceased travel times is an intended consequence? For all we know, the only intended consequence of this decision was to cut the cost of traffic lights or something random like that. This is why the question is so subjective. You simply cannot tell what is the unintended and intended consequences of this decision as we don’t have enough information.
ye I got this vibe too but since they say it's for users that what makes it a first-party impact. i emailed nesa once about a question i might email again.

#### zbolland

##### Active Member
It could be argued that by building a new tollway, greater noise and air pollution would make nearby land less attractive, decreasing its value (rather than increasing it), so C should be the correct answer.

But yeah, nothing can be done except pray to NESA... Best of luck for a state rank
Thanks dude! Best of luck for your results too!

#### zbolland

##### Active Member
ye I got this vibe too but since they say it's for users that what makes it a first-party impact. i emailed nesa once about a question i might email again.
Ikr, it’s so weird. May be worth a message to NESA

#### notme123

##### Well-Known Member
Ikr, it’s so weird. May be worth a message to NESA
too late now, markings are done. pre sure theyre announcing first in state soon.