rsingh said:
thanks azza!
so in the intro, do i say something like...
"The current stance of monetary policy is contractionary ..."
??
MIDLY contractionary. It really dosent have much effect. In fact the fiscally expansionary and monetary contrationary nearly cancel each other out. As i said its micro reform thats now needed. (Which the gov is starting to do...i.e workplace relations reform)
But yeh i set it out into a way that sunjet described.
I started with an intro that didnt include much of the theory though.
I then BREIFLY went into how the RBA effects rate and therefore acheives its economic management goals.
The main part of the question is effectiveness....so..
Basically what its effects on the economic indcators and the ability of RBA to respond to and eliminate economic threats as well as to ensure sustained economic growth. SO basically the policy's CURRENT ability to ensure that economic growth is at its highest and employment is at NAIRU sso growth without the effects of inflation and unemployment etc etc. ANd in that i include what i say about the current ineffectiveness of Macro reforms. That have done all they really can do in this booming economy.
It may seem obvious enough, but the biggest limitation of monetary policy IS that it can only really affect aggregate supply. Thats one side of the equation. So there must be a mix between all the policies avaliable to a government to acheive econmic objectives.
Ive read quite a few responses to this question at my schhol. Many just DESCRIBE how the RBA shifts rates and why, with a brief description of its effects. That will NOT get you the marks. You have to show the relationships between all the indicators, the different policies abaliable and the relationships between effects. Thats what i mean about synthesising a bit. The question dosent ask HOW the RBA acheives economic objectives, but rather the EFFECTIVENESS of them. Its a mistake ive seen so many people make in the trials