Sections III, IV - Extended Response (2 Viewers)

[Skeptyks]

What do you think would need to be included/not be included for someone to get 10-13 / 20

 

[Conspirocy]

does this sound okay for Q 25 guys??


Talk about changing industry production.
- Moving away from manufacturing
- Moving away from Agg.
- due to the GLOBALISATION PROCESs
- removal of import tarrifs
- introduction of FTAs, SEATO
- Importance of WTO in promoting trade
- Talk about how that effects COMPARATIVE ADVANTAGE & OPPORTUNITY COST

Then refer to china Growing population and how they are sourcing us for education (for our eduction)
Education industry grow

More efficient Mining industry

and less based instudies under threat due Asian countries becoming more specialised and our appreciated exchange rate

Question 25 was about impacts of changes in the global economy on the Balance of Payments. Do you mean question 26? Did you say how any of this impacts the balance of payments?

 

[chgeo]

Nobody will lose marks for "not including objectives in question 28", unless you missed something like growth or said something that was actually wrong. As somebody said above, it wasn't "all objectives" - an open question gives you scope to focus on what you want to talk about the most.
Also, marks are given for things done correctly, not things you've missed. It is possible to get a 20 without including every little thing.
If anything their intention was probably for you to talk only about internal objectives. Anybody that talked about every objective probably either did it quickly without depth or finished everything else in a rushed way; there is simply no way to explore all of topic 3 and 4 properly even in an hour and a half.
Finally, the markers aren't just like "20 for including every little thing perfectly that's relevant to the question", they use discretion in their marking. They will recognise the scope of the question and mark accordingly.

 

[simplythegreat]

i thought ecnoomic growth was not an objective? isn't it ecological/environmental sustainable growth?

 

[Rawf]

i thought ecnoomic growth was not an objective? isn't it ecological/environmental sustainable growth?

No.. economic growth and development is an objective itself.
environmental sustainability is a separate goal which often conflicts with Eco growth, however the government can aim for ESD if trying to achieve both goals

 

[David2245]

Good exam imo.
Structured 25 as:
-Quick description of BOP components
-International factors that impact BOGS (e.r fluctuations, terms of trade and Dutch disease, international and domestic growth, and talked about some recent trends)
-Repeat for Net Income (e.r fluctuations, international and domestic interest rates with debt servicing, business cycle fluctuations and talked about trends)
-Relate how these components are connected to CAD and KAF

I did to an extent as well, but given that the Net Income account is the structural component of the current accounts, I said that it isn't greatly impacted by fluctuations in the world economy as it is reflective of the Australian economy and showed this through the small fluctuations compared to the volatile cyclical components.

Would this be right?

 

[sillyboy44]

I did to an extent as well, but given that the Net Income account is the structural component of the current accounts, I said that it isn't greatly impacted by fluctuations in the world economy as it is reflective of the Australian economy and showed this through the small fluctuations compared to the volatile cyclical components.

Would this be right?

It's influenced by the savings-investment gap predominately, which is structural, but fluctuations in the global economy impact the availability of credit and interest rates and so the value of net primary income. Also, when demand is high for Australian exports then often to finance expansion, like with the mining boom, greater equity and/or debt is required from overseas. When demand for exports grows, so too does Australian firms' profitability and this means the value of dividends on foreign equity increases the deficit on net primary income.

So in short, global developments are a major source of change on Australia's net primary income.