|
|
本帖最后由 Kakashi_8 于 2015-7-16 11:45 编辑 1 H# ~, n4 O& L( |) J
' `2 G: a* b5 n, f; }: p& j
Question：16 - #27920
; U7 {; r3 c a( ]( JYour answer: B was correct!
- [2 B5 a" F2 L7 Z& I/ P5 DAbsolute PPP is of little use in determining exchange rates. In order to directly compare the prices of goods and services between two countries, identical individual goods and services are necessary to establish the validity of the law of one price. However, goods are rarely identical between various countries. In reality, restraints to trade, including differences in taxes, transportation and labor costs, rents, and government controls (e.g., tariffs) provide complexities that prevent direct comparison. Therefore, it is difficult (if not impossible) to confirm whether exchange rates are under- or overvalued according to absolute PPP.5 B# J6 U5 W8 y! n" y$ t% L1 ]
Question：17 - #272800 H8 w V! n& \8 X, q; f- v
Your answer: B was incorrect. The correct answer was C) the absence of private property rights.' d% R) W9 ]5 u$ {
The fact that the citizens lacked the property rights to seek compensation for environmental harm is seen to be the most important factor in the several environmental 租isasters・in the old Soviet Bloc countries. In industrial countries with similar climates and better specified property rights, the environmental record is much better. We have no evidence that consumer preferences with respect to environmental policy are significantly different in socialist economies.
) g, b& }6 w- X ~: w
7 }+ i5 `5 U! w* Q: {, F( P: S- h1 c. r9 a0 {4 \1 [7 D
Question：18 - #27279
. |0 b; O8 F$ q, N: V: qYour answer: C was incorrect. The correct answer was A) incentives exist to provide socially optimal levels of pollution.
+ J, P, a0 ?, Y3 Z, k# LWhen property rights are clearly defined, property owners have the right to compensation when their property is harmed. This will provide incentives for reduced pollution. Pollution will not be driven to zero since some level of pollution will result from productive activity and energy consumption. With property rights in place, the necessity of compensating those harmed will move the economy toward economically efficient levels of pollution.
[- w6 _# W( E, I
' o6 z; @2 s& xQuestion：19 - #27892
( l4 Y9 h6 {+ `+ d; z* l' MYour answer: B was correct!2 s! c2 u8 H2 ]0 v
The formula for covered interest rate parity is:7 @/ i2 c4 B$ D7 G
Exact methodology: F / S0 = (1 + rFC) / (1 + rDC)' `" _* T, ~8 ]& a. t
Forward premium or discount:
/ X' F: f: E T4 E+ s+ m(F ・S0) / S0 = [(1 + rFC) / (1 + rDC)] ・1 = (rFC ・rDC) / (1 + rDC)+ k. s( U. b# i+ r
By substituting: @5 r- [5 E+ ? _1 ]3 k% w6 U3 S1 E
%F = [(1 + 0.123) / (1 + 0.1176)] ・1
6 ^8 b! @0 Z2 K+ C6 I% R%F = [1.123 / 1.1176] ・1! [2 t j. v9 P2 j
%F = 0.0048- J) m7 g( m: t3 h& \7 H1 Z7 B9 N
F = 4.6404 PZ/EUR × (1 + 0.0048) = 4.6627 PZ/EUR# r, `$ b* q$ H
# ~8 M% r5 n# X7 w J
* ~! z9 k% C* E" F$ m4 o9 c5 uQuestion：20 - #27253
( d; |. c" i& t# I) m3 @Your answer: B was correct!
7 ~. h" R7 o I5 SRestricting entry of new firms into an industry will have the effect of raising prices which will result in a smaller quantity demanded compared to the free-market outcome. Inefficient firms will be protected from failure by these higher prices. Consumer choices will be less, rather than greater, as there is less incentive to innovate and firms with innovative ideas are not allowed to compete for business.
+ V7 \, \& H( d |
|
发表于 2015-7-16 11:43:24
楼主
发表于 2019-5-28 14:48:07
