economics question

boger

define friedmans theory of gonnel thought.

really need to find this out

europerson

boger wrote:

gonnel

I study economics at university, and I've never come across that word. What does it mean?

Enemy Of Fate

Never heard of it, although in fairness we never bothered to cover Economic history in class.We just skipped it and just kept revising everything else.We've revised everything on the course at least twice, and for some sections we've revised them 3 times (like perfect comptetion, the factor of production labour and national income).

boger

person in my class asked me this maybe he was taking the piss

Rozabeez

Looks like he is, I've never heard of it either.

analyse this

Pffff....a pointless waste of internet space! Once again boger you try people's patience! You make it so easy for people to dislike you!!:D First it was that stuff about your seemingly pointless need to achieve 600 points and now this!

md99

Ah, boger, that's crazy

GretchenWieners

If Economic Thought comes up it'll by JM Keynes or the fella that died last year. People forget about it, but it usually comes up as a 30mark q and in shorts!

fuinneamh

GretchenWieners wrote:

If Economic Thought comes up it'll by JM Keynes or the fella that died last year. People forget about it, but it usually comes up as a 30mark q and in shorts!

-friedman was the guy who died last year, thats all i know, our teacher hasn't done the economic taught yet.

md99

It will probably be a question on the Montearists instead of a question just on Friedman, maybe they'll mention him in it, but a very small number would answer if they gave a lot only on Friedman....

boger

if you look over the past exam papers you will see that perfect competition hasnt come up since 2002, and milton friedman advocated perfect competition, so the could put him up in the perfect competition question ( my teacher agrees wit me)

also their is also a good chance of smith coming up.

Time Magazine

boger wrote:

milton friedman advocated perfect competition

That post is very confused.

Enemy Of Fate

boger wrote:

if you look over the past exam papers you will see that perfect competition hasnt come up since 2002, and milton friedman advocated perfect competition, so the could put him up in the perfect competition question ( my teacher agrees wit me)

also their is also a good chance of smith coming up.

Theres not really much chance of that happening.The great thing about economics is pretty much everything is self contained, and since there is always a full, 75 mark question on one of the market structures each year, if its on PC this year (which I bet it will be) there'll be nothing in the question that isn't from the PC section.

dan719

Enemy Of Fate wrote:

Theres not really much chance of that happening.The great thing about economics is pretty much everything is self contained, and since there is always a full, 75 mark question on one of the market structures each year, if its on PC this year (which I bet it will be) there'll be nothing in the question that isn't from the PC section.

Except there is no way they will give a complete question on pc. They will ask for comparison with monopoly/oligopoly or else put price discriminating in at the tail end.So its not really that self contained.

md99

Market Structures, Supply/Demand, Elasticity, Costs, FOPs... I love micro!

Enemy Of Fate

dan719 wrote:

Except there is no way they will give a complete question on pc. They will ask for comparison with monopoly/oligopoly or else put price discriminating in at the tail end.So its not really that self contained.

Well PC has only come up twice on the exam (2002 and 1997), and both times the question was entirely self contained to the PC section.So I think its fair to assume that that will be the case again this year.

md99

Only twice? Was the course/paper changed or something?

Enemy Of Fate

Yep.I'm pretty sure the course was changed in '95, although my exam papers actually go all the way back to 91.The exams back before '95 are weird.I'm actually just looking at them now, and they don't have any set questions on the market structures (ie they don't have a full 75 mark one per year).They had a 75 mark question on Imperfect competition in 91, a 50 mark question on Oligopoly in 93, a 30 marker on Perfect competition in 94 and a 75 marker on Imperfect competition again in 95.

In 92 they just had a weird question on something that I don't recgonise at all, so I'm assuming it was dropped from the course.Also the other questions are kinda strange too.They give price discrimation its one full 75 mark question, and what should be 75 mark national income questions all seem to have a little bit of economic history thrown in there worth 20-25 marks.Also they don't seem to have any ''mathematical'' questions in the national income questions (ie no questions on C=G+I+X-M).Like I said weird.Still though the paper seems to be really easy, and doesn't seem to require any thought on behalf of the person sitting the exam at all.You just write down the answers you've learnt from the book.There doesn't seem to be any questions that require you to think about the effects of something happening.....which is pretty cool.Still though weird papers.The short questions are ****ing easy too.Everything only requires a 1 sentence answer.Damn them all.

Marshy

A1 students take note.

Inflation is now up to 5.1%
ECB decides to keep interest rates at 3.75%

But Im sure you are aware of that.

Enemy Of Fate

Marshy wrote:

A1 students take note.

Inflation is now up to 5.1%
ECB decides to keep interest rates at 3.75%

But Im sure you are aware of that.

I wasn't......although in fairness i'm only aiming for an A2.And i'm not really planning on doing any question that would involve me to use that information.Still though thanks anyways.

fuinneamh

http://www.rte.ie/business/index.html and click on economy at a glance is very helpful.

Also another key statistic is our balance of trade http://www.cso.ie/statistics/botrade.htm

And balance of payments trends http://www.cso.ie/statistics/balanceofpayments.htm

dan719

Enemy Of Fate wrote:

Yep.I'm pretty sure the course was changed in '95, although my exam papers actually go all the way back to 91.The exams back before '95 are weird.I'm actually just looking at them now, and they don't have any set questions on the market structures (ie they don't have a full 75 mark one per year).They had a 75 mark question on Imperfect competition in 91, a 50 mark question on Oligopoly in 93, a 30 marker on Perfect competition in 94 and a 75 marker on Imperfect competition again in 95.

In 92 they just had a weird question on something that I don't recgonise at all, so I'm assuming it was dropped from the course.Also the other questions are kinda strange too.They give price discrimation its one full 75 mark question, and what should be 75 mark national income questions all seem to have a little bit of economic history thrown in there worth 20-25 marks.Also they don't seem to have any ''mathematical'' questions in the national income questions (ie no questions on C=G+I+X-M).Like I said weird.Still though the paper seems to be really easy, and doesn't seem to require any thought on behalf of the person sitting the exam at all.You just write down the answers you've learnt from the book.There doesn't seem to be any questions that require you to think about the effects of something happening.....which is pretty cool.Still though weird papers.The short questions are ****ing easy too.Everything only requires a 1 sentence answer.Damn them all.

The economics course has not been changed since the early seventies, the exam paper is all that has been changed. The syllabus is currently undergoing a review. I have done papers back to 87 and they are just different is all. Sometimes I wonder why so many people on this forum are willing to spread misinformation.

Enemy Of Fate

dan719 wrote:

Sometimes I wonder why so many people on this forum are willing to spread misinformation.

Wow.If you'd had actually read all of my post you would have released that the only piece of ''misinformation'' I've spread is the fact that the papers changed in 1995, and even then you'll notice I said I wasn't 100% sure.Also its obvious that the course was (if not entirely changed) then altered slightly in 1995,as there are some things in the pre 95 papers that we just don't cover anymore (like the 1992 question I mentioned earlier).Anyways way to be a jackass over one little piece of ''misinformation''.Your parents must be so proud.

dan719

Enemy Of Fate wrote:

Wow.If you'd had actually read all of my post you would have released that the only piece of ''misinformation'' I've spread is the fact that the papers changed in 1995, and even then you'll notice I said I wasn't 100% sure.Also its obvious that the course was (if not entirely changed) then altered slightly in 1995,as there are some things in the pre 95 papers that we just don't cover anymore (like the 1992 question I mentioned earlier).Anyways way to be a jackass over one little piece of ''misinformation''.Your parents must be so proud.

Yeah I reckon they are actually , of course they could just be lying to try to keep my battered ego up.:p
And a direct quote from my economics teacher(the guy who wrote the revision book is the other teacher in our school-pat younger(gcc) so I reckon that between the two of them they would know) 'the course was not changed merely the focus of the papers has changed' which is not the same thing, those things that came up all those years ago could come up again.

Enemy Of Fate

dan719 wrote:

Yeah I reckon they are actually , of course they could just be lying to try to keep my battered ego up.:p
And a direct quote from my economics teacher(the guy who wrote the revision book is the other teacher in our school-pat younger(gcc) so I reckon that between the two of them they would know) 'the course was not changed merely the focus of the papers has changed' which is not the same thing, those things that came up all those years ago could come up again.

OK I can appreciate that, but go back and look at the 1992 question (think it was question 1).That stuff isn't in the book anymore!I've certainly never seen it before.