(a) Disposable income increase -> consumption increase -> Y increase (1+1)
(b) Y= C+I+G+NX
Given amount of cash transfer = increase in gov't spending
Part of cash transfer will be saved -> increase in consumption =/= cash transfer -> smaller increase in Y (1+1)
Government spending will all be used -> larger increase in Y (1+1)
(b) All cash voucher will be used (no saving) -> larger increase in Y (1 + 1)
堀宣行2022-04-29 16:00:44
弊在佢玩concept/推論/logic,玩好處壞處
堀宣行2022-04-29 16:13:14
持牌銀行法定貨幣係咪=儲備?
特急しなの2022-04-29 16:16:13
cut到不淪不類唔明正常
堀宣行2022-04-29 16:19:16
有冇人知點分儲備同存款
唔係講緊銀行乘數/信貸創造果d分別
係俾個example你去分果隻
堀宣行2022-04-29 16:24:34
(c) The can be explained by cost-benefit analysis
If the MC of no driving rule is extremely high, much higher than MB, then no action by human.
MC: Traveling cost beared by citizen, econmics loss of socitey
MB: No ppl die from damage