Solution :
In the context, it is given Alex and J.J. both are applying for a job openings in a law firm at Chicago. Both of them got the job offer but J.J. got lower salary than Alex. The salaries are different for both J.J and Alex. Some of the possible explanations for the difference in salaries that may be related to some scenarios are :
- Alex went to higher tier law school ---- difference in education
- J.J. is reentering the workforce after two years away --- difference in experiences.
- Alex will be working with a notoriously difficult boss --- compensating differentials.
- Alex is a man and J.J. Is a woman --- economic discrimination.
Answer:
Having invested $ 300 per month for the past 8 years, the total accumulated investment amount would be $ 28,800 (8 x 12 x 300). Now, having a total amount of $ 43,262, we find an increase of $ 14,462, which corresponds to the interest accumulated during said period. To know the percentage of the increase, we must perform a cross multiplication:
28,800 = 100
14,462 = X
(14,462 x 100) / 28,800 = X
1,446,200 / 28,800 = X
50.21 = X
As we can see, the investment had an increase of 50.21% during these 8 years. Now, the average increase in investment arises from the division of the total percentage of increase by the number of years. So, given that 50.21 / 8 = 6.27, the average annual return rate of this investment is 6.27%.
Answer:
affect nominal but not real variables. This view that money is ultimately neutral is consistent with classical theory.
Explanation:
This idea is held by classical economists (not by most economists) since they believe in the quantitative theory of money:
MV = PQ
- M = quantity of money
- V = velocity of money
- P = price level
- Q = quantity of goods
Classical theory was abandoned 90 years ago (according to classical theory, recessions were not possible and couldn't exist, but then the Great Depression came and the impossible became true). Neo-classical or monetarists appeared in the 1960s, and lately, neo-neo-classical appeared with George W. Bush. The problem with the quantitative theory is that it needs the following things to be true in order to hold, and empirical evidence over the last 90 years showed that none of them are true:
- the velocity of money has to be constant (AND IT IS NOT CONSTANT)
- real output is independent on money supply (NOT TRUE)
- causation goes from money to prices (MODERN ECONOMISTS BELIEVE IT IS THE OTHER WAY)
