Section I: Multiple Choice (2 Viewers)

[maximilien101]

7= c the question says agg dmd not eco growth, they r both right but c is "more correct" as wot happens when u/e reaches its natural rate is the structural u/e are employed, reducing u/e initially, even if they don't have the appropriate skills. therefore they are less productive, hence higher inflation.

 

[soapywater]

I think I got 19/20...

first question wrong i put A, i looked at it again on the wednesday and i was like oh shhhhhh....

 

[runnable]

7= c the question says agg dmd not eco growth, they r both right but c is "more correct" as wot happens when u/e reaches its natural rate is the structural u/e are employed, reducing u/e initially, even if they don't have the appropriate skills. therefore they are less productive, hence higher inflation.

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

 

[shakky15]

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

no, but woolies can hire a lawyer to operate the registers or stack the shelves.

an increase in demand wont require more lawyers anyway - itll require retail and manufacturing jobs more i assume.

assembly line people, waiters, cashiers, shelf stackers, box packers etc. dont need skills to do that...

 

[runnable]

no, but woolies can hire a lawyer to operate the registers or stack the shelves.

an increase in demand wont require more lawyers anyway - itll require retail and manufacturing jobs more i assume.

assembly line people, waiters, cashiers, shelf stackers, box packers etc. dont need skills to do that...

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 the vast majority of jobs are in service industry and boom industry is mining.

 

[shakky15]

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 the vast majority of jobs are in service industry and boom industry is mining.

lol. *hangs head in defeat*

its still C.

 

[runnable]

lol. *hangs head in defeat*

its still C.

Lol.

Just wait for the answer.

P.S. (A)

 

[pissedoff]

Even though I put A

I spoke to my eco teacher and because it said initial it's C

No more argument. It's C.

 

[AWrules]

C C C C C

 

[AWrules]

If you use your brain and actually think about its name: Non-Accelerating Infaltion Rate of Unemployment, you will realise it's a goal not a minimum level. It's a rate of unemployemnt that would not cause inflation, and so when it does it go below it, reduces unemployment but accelerates inflation.

It's C

 

[lilley.matthew]

Love the way that "sorry, but no" is supposedly a coherent argument against the extended Phillips curve. I agree with the above that the definition of NAIRU should make the answer obvious

 

[shsshs]

Yes unemployment can fall below the NAIRU.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAIRU
end of story

 

[lilley.matthew]

And what a claim to say only no-skills work will increase in times of growth. Especially in Australia where the vast majority of jobs are in service industry and boom industry is mining.

And what a misfabrication of what he was saying...Thanks for proving our point however. Structural problems only have to be overcome by excessive AD in one area of the economy (such as low skilled), and unemployment will fall even if it doesn't fall in other sectors.

And on aside, while A has been pretty solidly discussed and debunked i.e. as internally inconsistent, pretty much no attention has been paid to C, except the equally dogmatic and incorrect line that...

"Unemployment cannot fall under the NAIRU."

Sounds like a force-fed piece of propoganda brainwashing taught by the commies

 

[runnable]

Wait how is A debunked? Amazing.


EDIT: Wait you know what... Stop discussing this. Wait for the answers.


Who's the bigger man?

 

[Scissors]

wow, people are STILL discussing this exam. it's over people, get over it.

 

[Terlob]

EDIT: Wait you know what... Stop discussing this. Wait for the answers.

Lol.

Just wait for the answer.

P.S. (A)

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

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

Just wait for the answer.

I'm just gonna wait for the answers now

Really, lets stop convincing each other and just wait for the answers.

We should just stop talking about this.

i think we will just agree to disagree and wait for the official answer whenever it comes out .

Listen to yourself... STFU

 

[lilley.matthew]

I was wondering when someone was going to point that out. If you want to discuss it, by all means do so. But don't by hypocritical.

P.S. Nice job, i'm sure an English teacher would call that efficient quoting

 

[runnable]

Listen to yourself... STFU

Lol good effort there. But people wouldn't listen.

 

[runnable]

I was wondering when someone was going to point that out. If you want to discuss it, by all means do so. But don't by hypocritical.

P.S. Nice job, i'm sure an English teacher would call that efficient quoting

What hypocrisy? Its not as if I posted "stop talking about this" then post myself. Its others who don't freaking stop. Now just keep quiet or in the words of terlob. STFU.

 

[JJmn]

Guys wtf? stop posting already! Its over!