Economics predictions!!!

cormac17

well just wonder what ppl r thinkin will come up on Wednesday's paper???

me hopin 4 perfect comp,elasticity,demand nd supply, labour/capital, maybe a question like explain the effects on the irish economy wit the maturity of SSIA's!

it should b a grand exam!! better b,,need an A1 to keep my points up!!!

Feddd

cormac17 wrote:

well just wonder what ppl r thinkin will come up on Wednesday's paper???

me hopin 4 perfect comp,elasticity,demand nd supply, labour/capital, maybe a question like explain the effects on the irish economy wit the maturity of SSIA's!

it should b a grand exam!! better b,,need an A1 to keep my points up!!!

Not a fan of Macro?

I'm thinking elasticity/perf comp/economic growth/inflation for my A team but I have plenty choice in case things go wrong. Leaving out Govt as I'm not very up to date with politics/economic situation in ireland.

carlowboy

I got the same tips as you lot but I'm afraid they'll pull a stinker of a test after physics today.

Enemy Of Fate

This is like the 3rd time this thread has been made in the last week....Ah well.Anyways predictions: Perfect competition, Labour, Elasticity, International Trade, National Income (Y=C+G+I+X-M).I'd be shocked if anyone of these didn't come up.

carlowboy

Enemy of Fate, you better not be shocked on Wednesday at 9.35 am then!

Enemy Of Fate

Thankfully i've covered everything bar economic history and banking......so unless EVERY question comes from those 2 chapters.....i'll be fine!

Huh.Just realised I neglected to study SSIAs.May as well do that now, just in case I get a question on it.Stupid SSIAs.

Feddd

Risky not covering the historians. They may pop one into elasticity. Just do the important ones i.e. keynes, supply siders etc (Can't remember, havn't gone over it yet).

Enemy Of Fate

Feddd wrote:

Risky not covering the historians. They may pop one into elasticity. Just do the important ones i.e. keynes, supply siders etc (Can't remember, havn't gone over it yet).

We never actually covered it in class, but I know a little bit (Keynes theory of liquidity preference, Adam Smith's canons of taxation), so I doubt i'll really be asked bout anything outside of them.

Still though guess I may as well cram the section tomorrow.I've everything else covered anyways, so I may as well do something to kill time!

carlowboy

Smith's canons of taxation is different to the material on the History of Economic thought.

Enemy Of Fate

carlowboy wrote:

Smith's canons of taxation is different to the material on the History of Economic thought.

Eh?Isn't the history of economic thought all bout the economists and their contribution to economics (eg Marx writing Das Kapital).

md99

the economists are hugely ignored...I'm doing a bit on Keynes, Smith and the Monetarists...wouldn't go near a long question on them, which is rare anyway, and marked hard according to my teacher...

dyl10

Enemy Of Fate wrote:

This is like the 3rd time this thread has been made in the last week....Ah well.Anyways predictions: Perfect competition, Labour, Elasticity, International Trade, National Income (Y=C+G+I+X-M).I'd be shocked if anyone of these didn't come up.

Id go along with that but LDCs are a certain for me

carlowboy

Enemy Of Fate wrote:

Eh?Isn't the history of economic thought all bout the economists and their contribution to economics (eg Marx writing Das Kapital).

Yes, but his canons of taxation wouldn't be under that section. Only write about them if you're asked for them specifically.

Enemy Of Fate

carlowboy wrote:

Yes, but his canons of taxation wouldn't be under that section. Only write about them if you're asked for them specifically.

Oh of course.We probably won't be though.There was a REALLY nice question bout it last year.Was worth 25 marks and all you had to do was state and explain the 4 characteristics, and then say wheter you think its good or bad and give 2 reasons.Lovely question.

carlowboy

It was. Here, when you did tests before, was it possible for you to get full marks in a question like and short questions? Because my teacher never ever gave full marks, even for a short question, even if it was 100% correct. I'm wondering if its a trend among economics teachers.

Feddd

carlowboy wrote:

It was. Here, when you did tests before, was it possible for you to get full marks in a question like and short questions? Because my teacher never ever gave full marks, even for a short question, even if it was 100% correct. I'm wondering if its a trend among economics teachers.

Its hard to get full marks in questions in enocomics, need a good bit of elaboration. Just think as hard as you can for ANYTHING you can add in and should be ok.

But I think hes just marking hard if he won't even give full marks in the shorts tbh.

Marshy

I've a feeling it'll be 3 micro and 5 macro again this year. Those bastards don't want us all just doing micro. They can burn in hell! :eek:

cheater

Heres to hoping they don't put a rotten paper on, having read some of the physics threads that is pretty scary, has to be the worst feeling in the world opening your paper and just being completely baffled by the whole thing!... PANIC! Economics never seems to throw up a terrible paper, fingers crossed...

Hoping for:
(i)Nice Short Questions
(ii)Perfect Comp
(iii)Elasticity
(iv)Supply/Demand
(v)Price Discrimination
(vi)FOP's - namely Labour
and then Money/Banking,Credit Creation,Circular Flow of Income etc.!

If they were to throw up a wobbler, perhaps they might put Monopoly on as Perfect is so tipped however, I can't see that happening..and Monopoly is pretty ok anyways!

carlowboy

Perfect is preferable though!

cheater

for sure!

Enemy Of Fate

carlowboy wrote:

It was. Here, when you did tests before, was it possible for you to get full marks in a question like and short questions? Because my teacher never ever gave full marks, even for a short question, even if it was 100% correct. I'm wondering if its a trend among economics teachers.

Well I usually get 94-96/100 marks for my short questions...so i'm obviously getting almost full marks in most questions.Maybe your definitions are slightly off....Economics isn't like Business, where they'll accept anything thats even sort of right as a definition.They need to be pretty much 100% correct.Still I always do 8 questions just in case theres something slightly wrong with another.And besides they give you loads of time for short questions.The only take bout 15 minutes, and yet they're worth 25% of the exam!!

And also they'd better put on PC.Its the only market structure I know well enough to get 75 marks in.Could probably get 60+ on IC and Monopoly, and perhaps 50+ on Oligopoly....Hmm.Must look over oligopoly later.Still though I don't see how they could not put PC on.I mean out of 12 years its only been on twice....and the last time was 3 or 4 years ago (can't remember which.I know labour or PC came up in 2004, and then the other came up in 2003 but I can't remember which).Ah well.The good thing bout the market structures is that they're all very similar (cept for the LR equilibriums of the firms), I mean the only big differences between the characteristics of PC and IC is the fact that in IC the goods are differentiated by branding and theres competitive advertising.The rest are the same.

cheater

Yeah, you're right, well I think everybody will be most comfortable with Perfect Competition, most of the other market structures are manageable! It seems everyone is hoping for a micro dominated paper...personally I am, this may mean that it will be marked harder, I guess though with economics if its right its right so they can't not give you marks if you have the right stuff down! Pleeease give us a reasonable paper, I'm only lookin for a C3/C2 and I'd be happy, anything better will just be a bonus!

Feddd

cheater wrote:

Economics never seems to throw up a terrible paper, fingers crossed...

I would define 05 as terrible as there was no elasticity. (It was 05, right?)

A word of advice to people. Considering economics is the most predictable paper in the LC(Everyone knows every year what market/fop etc will be up) I would imagine they could put oligopoly up as noone will have studied it as it was on last year.
Would be very mean but very possible. not as mean as leaving elasticity out for example.

carlowboy

Enemy Of Fate wrote:

Well I usually get 94-96/100 marks for my short questions...so i'm obviously getting almost full marks in most questions.Maybe your definitions are slightly off....Economics isn't like Business, where they'll accept anything thats even sort of right as a definition.They need to be pretty much 100% correct.Still I always do 8 questions just in case theres something slightly wrong with another.And besides they give you loads of time for short questions.The only take bout 15 minutes, and yet they're worth 25% of the exam!!

They were almost word perfect from the book though. And in the mocks, he put in a question that I had read over the marking schemes of before and my answers were what's exactly what's in the marking scheme and I only got 61/75. I'd be happy with a B1/A2 to be honest.

cheater

Your teacher didn't correct my pre, or perhaps a son,daughter or relation of his? :rolleyes: Our pre's were corrected awfully, and the examiner even had time to leave smart comments in students papers! Oh well I got a D1 in the pre and that was with no work done, and terribly corrected so hopefully I'll improve somewhat from that, my economic reasoning and understanding has improved.. or so I tell myself anyways!:)

Feddd

carlowboy wrote:

They were almost word perfect from the book though. And in the mocks, he put in a question that I had read over the marking schemes of before and my answers were what's exactly what's in the marking scheme and I only got 61/75. I'd be happy with a B1/A2 to be honest.

Don't worry, your teacher just marks real hard. Don't let his hard marking un-motivate you.

cheater

This hard marking will probably lead to a pleasant surprise in August

Enemy Of Fate

cheater wrote:

Pleeease give us a reasonable paper, I'm only lookin for a C3/C2 and I'd be happy, anything better will just be a bonus!

All I actually need is a B3......but I'm capable of an A1, and I would consider anything less than a B1 a MAJOR disappointment.I mean in the mocks it was my highest result of 68%, even though I only got 75% of the paper done (due to my school's terrible organisational skills I lost 30 minutes of the exam).Now if we assume constant returns to scale (which we really shouldn't but who cares), then if I do 100% of the paper I should get 90.6666668%......which would be brilliant!

Feddd wrote:

I would define 05 as terrible as there was no elasticity. (It was 05, right?)

Yes it was 05, but 05 wasn't a hard paper.I mean sure it was annoying that there was no elasticity, but they gave you easy questions to make up for it (if I remember correctly they gave you a Y=C+G+I+X-M question that was worth like 30+ marks.....and its just ****ing simple maths!!).

carlowboy wrote:

They were almost word perfect from the book though. And in the mocks, he put in a question that I had read over the marking schemes of before and my answers were what's exactly what's in the marking scheme and I only got 61/75. I'd be happy with a B1/A2 to be honest.

Well thats kind of weird....Maybe you were penalised for textbook answers.They probably want you to show you actually UNDERSTAND the stuff, rather than just sticking it down on the page.Still though I find it hard to believe they would be able to determine that just from looking at your paper.....Oh well!I'm sure you'll get a better marker for the real thing....and if not sure you can always appeal.

By the way on that note, would anyone here bother to appeal if they got the points for their course?I mean I know someone who says if they don't get a B1 in Accountancy they're going to appeal, even if they got the points for their first choice....but I just don't understand why!Why would you care so much if you already have the points?!I mean you could actually go down a grade (I know most don't, but i'm sure some do).So if you already have what you wanted, why would you bother?Es macht kein sense!!

carlowboy

well, if you got to look at the script and you thought you deserved to go up then why not? LC isn't all about college places. There's a certain amount of pride too.

whatshername!!

Im going to go in and check over all my exams with my teacher before i think about appealing. ill view them even if i get the points just out of interest

Enemy Of Fate

carlowboy wrote:

well, if you got to look at the script and you thought you deserved to go up then why not? LC isn't all about college places. There's a certain amount of pride too.

Not for me!!As long as I get into my course I don't really care how I do.Hell as long as I get the points i'm not even going to go in and view the scripts.I just couldn't be bothered.Of course if I don't get the points.....then thats a VERY different story.Thankfully i'm pretty sure I will....so it'll be grand!