answers

watching

views

23 Jan 2018

Domestic producers often base their claim for import protection in the fact that workers in country X are paid substandard wages. Is this a valid argument for protection? Can you give examples of when it did/did not work? Is there any trade restriction that the US government could impose that would have a negative/positive impact on where you work? Explain.

answers

watching

378

views

For unlimited access to Homework Help, a Homework+ subscription is required.

You have 0 free answers left.
Get unlimited access to 3.8 million step-by-step answers.

Get unlimited access

Already have an account? Log in

glorysoft2Lv10

1 Oct 2022

Unlock all answers

Get 1 free homework help answer.

Already have an account? Log in

You have 0 free answers left.
Get unlimited access to 3.8 million step-by-step answers.

Get unlimited access

Already have an account? Log in

Tod ThielLv2

26 Jan 2018

Already have an account? Log in

Related questions

31. A country's tax system influences the attractiveness of investing in that country and affects the relative level of profitability for an MNC.

a. True

b. False

32. Points inside a production possibilities frontier represent

a. unattainable production combinations

b. efficiency

c. situations where supply exceeds demand

d. unemployment of resources

33. Firms in a high-wage nation like the U.S. can compete effectively with imports from low-wage nations if

a. the U.S. reduces tariffs on imports

b. low-wage nations impose tariffs on U.S. made goods

c. labor productivity is higher in the low-wage nation

d. labor productivity is higher in the U.S.

34. Assume that production in the United States is valued at $100,000. National income is therefore $100,000. Of their income, workers save $2000, pay $6,000 in taxes, spend $89,000 on consumer goods, and spend $2000 on imports. Businesses spend $5,000 in new investment spending. And, foreigners spend $1000 on exports. To avoid any problems of inflation or unemployment, the government should have a budget deficit or surplus of:

a. $2,000 surplus

b. $1,000 deficit

c. $2,000 deficit

d. $1000 surplus

e. $0 deficit

35. Autarky means-----------------------------------------------------------------

a. the absence of government

b. lack of agriculture

c. self-sufficient, in the absence of international trade

d. short of exchange rates

36. The more people there are----------------------, the less the public as a whole will spend on goods and services.

a. unemployed

b. underemployed

c. employed

d. as discouraged workers

37, Which of the following theories holds that countries will produce and export products that use large amounts of production factors that they have in abundance?

a. Mercantilism

b. The theory of absolute advantage

c. The factor endowment theory

d. None of the above.

38. Suppose that a consumer has a marginal propensity to consume of 0.79. If this consumer earns an extra $1220, her saving would be expected to increase by-----------------------------

39. Many countries in Asia, Africa, and South America-----------------------

a. Are developing countries

b. Are industrialized nations

c. Have a high demand for nonessential products

d. Do not trade

40. Which two of the following are regarded as the main aims of the World Trade Organization (WTO)?

a) To eliminate discrimination in world trade

b) To provide financial assistance to countries with debt

c) To reduce tariff barriers

d) To make infant industry protection illegal

e) To help give preferences to smaller economies

b) and e) a) and c) a) and d) c) and e) b) and d)

41. Last year Sophia's nominal income increased by 12% while the price level rose by 5.5%. Consequently, Sophia's real income:

a. rose by approximately 7%

b. fell by approximately 1%

c. rose by approximately 2%

d. ------------------------------------

42. Consumer surplus

a. is always positive.

b. for a particular unit of consumption is computed by taking the difference between quantity demand and quantity supplied.

c. for all units consumed is the area below demand and below market price over all the units consumed.

d. added to producer surplus provides a measure of the net gain to society from the production and consumption of the good.

43. A decline in Real GDP for six or more consecutive months is called-------------------------------

a. A trough

b. A recession

c. An expansion

d. A recovery

44. What do we call the situation where capital grows faster than the labor force?

a. economic growth

b. technological change

c. productivity growth

d. capital deepening

45. The terms of trade are-------------------------------------------

a. the cost of transportation between countries

b. the ratio of wages in two countries

c. the terms which are used in the trade negotiations

d. the rate at which two products can be exchanged

tealtiger674

Economist claim that terrorist attacks can be viewed as another type of trade barrier. Do you agree? Why?

After reading The African Business Journal article about Boko Haram in, "Boko Haram and its impact on the Nigerian Economy." Do you think this terrorist organization and it's action in Nigeria is having an impact on Nigeria's import/export industry (trade)?

If so, what type of affect do you think the terror group has on Nigeria's import/export business?

Boko Haram and its Impact on the Nigerian

Economy

By Angus Gillespie

Despite emerging from the murky shadows within Nigeria just a dozen years ago,

Boko Haram has quickly earned itself an infamous reputation for being one of the

most callous and violent radical Islamist groups in African history. In fact, itâs

already been tagged a terrorist group by western countries such as the United

States. Over the past 12 to 15 months, Boko Haram has unleashed a massive

wave of violence, fear and chaos throughout the northern African country â so

much so, that itâs know seen by many as having a noticeable impact on the way

the country operates, and by extension, is hindering its economic well being to a

widening degree.

Founded in 2002, Boko Haram is an ultra extremist Islamic cult focusing primarily

on the edict that Western education is forbidden. Military operations were

launched in 2009 to support their cause in creating an independent Islamic state.

It also has roots that can be traced to the northern part of Cameroon and parts of

Niger. The Boko Haram leadership has international connections to Al-Qaeda.

Suspected Boko Haram militants have killed dozens of Nigerians in recent weeks

and there is no sign of the violence abating. In one attack, gunmen disguised as

soldiers fired on a crowd in a church compound. The radical sect is known for

attacking churches, schools, and police stations. Tourists are also considered fair

game. Violence linked to the Boko Haram insurgency has resulted in an

estimated 12,000 killings since 2002, although that figure has gone up

considerably since 2009 when the group began to heavily arm itself as a militia.

Making matters worse for the Nigerian government of Goodluck Jonathan is that

some of the attacks come amidst reports some army generals have been aiding

the rebel militants, on the belief that a national coup is going to take place.

Nigerian media sources have reported that as many as 10 generals and five

other senior military officers have already been tried before the courts for

supplying arms and information to Boko Haram. However, at least one Nigerian

military spokesman called the reports âfalsehoodsâ.

This contradicted Interior Minister Abba Moro said it was âgood newsâ that the

army had identified soldiers who were undermining the fight against the

insurgents, and that it sent a strong message to other serving officers.

Boko Haram has waged an increasingly bloody insurgency since 2009 in an

attempt to create an Islamic state in Nigeria.

One small town that has been hard hit by the violence is Attagara, where the

village church came under attack leaving at least 20 people dead.

Nigeriaâs government has been facing mounting pressure both at home and

abroad to do more to tackle the group and bring about the release of more than

300 schoolgirls kidnapped by the group on April 15.

President Jonathan originally declared a state of emergency in May of last year in

the three northern states where Boko Haram is, and has been, most active â

Borno, Adamawa and Yobe.

Boko Haram retaliated by stepping up its bombing campaign in cities and

launching mass attacks on small towns and villages.

Media correspondents in those regions say that since the infamous kidnapping of

more than 300 schoolgirls, the attacks have become an almost daily occurrence.

The campaign to free the girls that began in their home village has now gone

global, with the U.S., Canadian and British governments offering support to help

with the rescue. Itâs believed about 55 girls have managed to escape their

captors since being taken hostage in April. The government has ruled out

swapping the girls for detained insurgents associated with Boko Haram.

President Jonathan has promised to address the poverty that helps fuel the

uprising â but only once the insurgency is put down. The World Bank says twothirds

of 170 million Nigerians struggle in poverty in Africaâs biggest oil producer.

Despite the fact there is so much poverty and lack of widespread education,

Nigeria remains Africaâs largest economy â thanks in large part to the massive oil

reserves that are often exploited by international corporations. That said, to put

things into perspective, only about 3% of the worldâs oil supply is found in the

country. More recent successful business sectors have included the likes of

banking, telecommunications and a burgeoning film industry. Agriculture and

services have also been two traditional economic staples for the country,

although neither has shown much in the way of expansion over the past 10 to 20

years. To its credit, the country has also been diversifying the core economic

drivers away from energy and agriculture. The nationâs GDP is now $490 billion,

just shy of the economies of countries like Norway and Sweden.

When an organization managed to get the president of the country to declare a

state of emergency, it stands to reason it has the ability to unwieldy a

tremendous amount of damage on the country, be it through violence or

economic crippling.

Economic Impact

Since Boko Haram emerged from the shadows about four years ago, once armed

militarily, one of the first obvious economic concerns was the almost immediate

drop in foreign direct investment (FDI), with the concern being whether the

government had the wherewithal to deal with the serious insurrection and stave

off the many decades of political instability the country has faced. According to

the World Investment Report (WIR) 2013, FDI flows into Nigeria dropped by 21%

in just one year â from $8.9 billion in 2011 to $7 billion in 2012. The loss of $1.9

billion for a country in desperate need of money â such as Nigeria â was a

staggering blow.

The monumental decline in FDI over such a short period of time sent ripple

effects throughout the international community, creating a negative domino

effect. Itâs a rock heading downhill that continues to gain momentum, and it will

be up to Jonathan and his government not only to slow it down, but to stop it

altogether, or it will begin all over again.

FDI into Nigeria has a direct impact on trade, while also ensuring progression of

economic development to the south. FDI inflow also supplements the available

domestic capital by stimulating the productivity of domestic investments.

Someone troublesome is the high codependency ratio between the inflow of FDI,

the Nigerian oil sector, and the countryâs GDP.

A scientific study found that a unit increase in FDI into the Nigerian oil sector will

increase the countryâs GDP by approximately 16 units. This shows that the

Nigerian oil and gas sector, which is the mainstay of the economy, has a high

rate of exposure to foreign direct investment.

Between the lack of jobs, and the increasing violence with the likes of terrorist

groups such as Boko Harm, there has been a mass movement of Nigerian

citizens looking to settle in areas not impacted by the violence. The trouble is

this: the areas not affected by the violence are most often areas that have

nothing in terms of sustainable economic activity that would allow a person or a

family to survive. Living in the dangerous regions is where thereâs hope for

employment.

The rush to escape from the northern part of the country that has been hard hit is

already affecting the profitability of businesses in the region. Itâs no reached the

point where accredited banks have begun closing down some branches due to a

huge decrease of economic activity. On top of that, a number of employees at

these businesses are demanding to be reassigned to areas that are less volatile.

As noted many times before, a lot of the current problems with terrorist uprisings

can easily be pinpointed to a lack of government leadership due to the constant

political insecurity, and especially so in the northern region.

Once the banks and other businesses decide to pack up and move elsewhere, it

leaves the region in a state of economic depletion, and one that wonât easily be

regained. Itâs always quicker destroying something than it is building it up. The

people of Nigeria are hoping President Jonathanâs government takes drastic

action to bring about more stability in the country and soon. Or, it will be a long

road to recovery for a nation that can already ill afford this type of economic

setback.

More than $21 billion of foreign direct investment poured into Nigeria in 2013, up

28% from the year before. The country does not want to see that slide backwards

due to political instability and the onset of widespread violence. The country has

attracted the most foreign direct investment in sub-Saharan Africa since 2007,

according to Ernst & Young. But all of that could be quickly eroded if the violence

is not snuffed out.

Many financial analysts seem to be of the opinion that the impact on foreign

investment will largely be determined by geography. As example, investors may

pull out funding from manufacturing and infrastructure investments in northern

Nigeria, which has been ravaged by violence. But the resource rich southern

region has been spared from violence to this point. This could be one of the

factors as to why Nigeriaâs stock market has been seemingly unaffected by all the

recent turmoil. The benchmark equity index has only declined about 1% since the

kidnappings in mid April; so for all intents and purposes, it has been business as

usual.

So just how bad is it in Nigeria? It is perhaps best summed up in a balanced

report by an analyst with Ernst & Young.

âNigeria epitomizes this almost bipolar view of Africa,â says Henry Egbiki, West

Africa regional leader at Ernst & Young. âFor many of us already doing business

on the continent it is an exciting, dynamic, high octane growth market; for some

others, often on the outside looking in, it seems chaotic, unstable, and uncertain.

The reality is obviously less cut and dried than either of these extremes.â

The next 12 to 18 months will be critical for the government and how it responds

to the upswing in violent outbreaks by radical groups such as Boko

Haram. Humanitarian groups and countries will be looking on from a human

rights point of view, but you can also bet that the international investment

community will be keeping a close watch as well.

Because sports facilities are not expected to generate additional net output in a metropolitan area and no systematic empirical analysis ever finds evidence that they do, sports facilities cannot be counted on to augment tax collections. Indeed, public expenditures occasioned by operating a sports facility generally exceed revenues generated by it. To assess the budgetary impact of a new facility, however, it is necessary to know the financing and lease terms. If the financing burden is large and falls primarily on public coffers and if the lease terms are concessionary to the team, then the public obligation for debt service, infrastructure maintenance, environmental remediation, incremental sanitation and security expense, probable cost overruns, and subsequent facility enhancement is likely to generate a substantial budgetary hole in the municipal, county and/or state accounts. Such budgetary gaps must be filled either with decreased government services or with higher taxes; either will produce a drag on the local economy. Unfortunately for host cities, the monopoly status of the major team sports leagues has enabled the teams to drive impressive bargains in negotiating financing and lease terms. Even as sports facilities have grown more and more expensive, in some cases costing over half a billion dollars, public contributions to construction costs have continued to average nearly 70 percent. Quirk and Fort (1992, pp. 170-171), after studying 25 facilities built between 1978 and 1992, concluded that the host cities provided on average a $7 million per year operating subsidy to the team. In none of the cases did the host city receive a positive net operating income from the facility. The perverse influence of the 1986 Tax Reform Act on lease terms described above and the escalating costs of recent facility construction suggest that the size of these subsidies has only grown since 1992. Promotional economic impact studies often claim that an additional positive economic stimulus is derived from the actual construction of the sports facility. The problem with this contention is that the funds to build the stadium or arena have an opportunity cost. If the construction is funded by the city, then the city must raise the money via higher taxes or reduced services. Spending on construction thereby causes lower spending by the government in other areas or lower disposable household income. If stimulating a local economy were so simple, every municipal government could guarantee full employment with a public works program that hired workers to dig holes in the ground and then hired other workers to fill the holes. Only in the case where some of the funding comes from state or federal coffers can the city expect to experience a net job gain from facility construction, and in this case, the gain comes at the expense of worker layoffs elsewhere in the state or country. The logical implications of both multiplier and budget impact analysis are consistent with the results of empirical studies that fail to detect any discernible effects on local economic growth associated with a sports facility or a team.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. They argue that the lack of economic benefits is due in part to the budgetary impact of the stadium construction. What do they mean? Explain your answer with sufficient detail to convince me you read that part of the article