Suppose a closed economy with no government spending which in equilibrium is producing an output and income of 2250. Suppose also that the marginal propensity to consume is 0.80, and that, if at full employment, the economy would produce an output and income of 3850 By how much would the government need to cut taxes (T) to bring the economy to full employment?

Suppose a closed economy with no government spending which in equilibrium is producing an output and income of 2250. Suppose also that the marginal propensity to consume is 0.80, and that, if at full employment, the economy would produce an output and income of 3850 By how much would the government need to cut taxes (T) to bring the economy to full employment?

ENGR.ECONOMIC ANALYSIS

14th Edition

ISBN:9780190931919

Author:NEWNAN

Publisher:NEWNAN

Chapter1: Making Economics Decisions

Section: Chapter Questions

Problem 1QTC

See similar textbooks

Similar questions

Suppose the short-run equilibrium level of real GDP is $4,400 billion and the MPC = 0.9. If full employment 1 (natural) real GDP is $5,000 billion, what fiscal policy action could the government undertake to put the economy at full-employment equilibrium, according to the simple Keynesian model? O Reduce government spending by $60 billion O Increase government spending by $60 billion O Reduce taxes by $60 billion O Increase taxes by $60 billion
Which of the following could NOT be contractionary fiscal policy tool? OA) decreasing government expenditure OB)decreasing taxes Oc) decreasing transfer payments
Suppose the economy begins at full employment. Label this starting point as point "1." Then, suppose that an upcoming political election causes anxiety among consumers and consumption falls. Show the effects on your graph and label the new equilibrium point "2." Lastly, our government wants the economy to return to full-employment as quickly as possible. Should it intervene? If so, show the impact of successful fiscal policy on your graph. Label this new equilibrium point "3."
In the above figures, supposed that there is no import or proportional tax. To pull the economy back to the long-run equilibrium, the government can cut taxes by $ trillion. 1) 4 2) 8 3) 1.33 4) 2.67
Q)If the MPC .8 and we have a 200B GDP Gap, how much will initial expenditures need to increase to bring the economy to full employment GDP.
Question 2 Full explain this question
Suppose that real GDP is currently $19.3 trillion, potential GDP is $23.0 trillion, the government purchases multiplier is 1.6, and the tax multiplier is -1.6. Holding other factors (such as prices and interest rates) constant, how will taxes (T) need to change to bring the economy to equilibrium at potential GDP? Provide your answer in dollars measured in trillions rounded to two decimal places. Use a negative sign for negative changes. Do not include any symbols, such as "S," "," "%," or "," in your answer. Your Answer: Answer
Suppose the economy begins at full employment. Label this starting point as point "1." Then, suppose that a long strike by coal miners reduces the coal supply and increases the price of coal. Show the effects on your graph and label the new equilibrium point "2." Lastly, suppose our government wants the economy to return to full-employment as quickly as possible. Should the government intervene? If so, show the impact of successful fiscal policy on your graph. Label this new equilibrium point "3."
To enact Contractionary Fiscal Policy, the federal government must be running a budget ___________.
Which of the following is an appropriate fiscal policy response to a negative GDP gap? a. raise income tax rates b. increase government spending c. raise real interest rates d. lower real interest rates
Consider the following economy: C = 300 + 0.8 (Y – T) I = $300 G = $200 and T = $250 What is the equilibrium level of national income? What is the change in national income, if only government spending increases by $10? What is the government spending multiplier? What is the change in national income, if only taxes increase by $10? What is the tax multiplier? Based on (b) and (c), does the balanced budget multiplier theorem hold? What is the change in national income, if both government spending and taxes increase by $10 each?
Suppose actual real GDP is $7.87 trillion, potential real GDP is $14.36 trillion, and the marginal propensity to consume is 0.61. If we ignore price effects, by how many trillions of dollars should the government change its lump sum taxes to fix the gap? (Round this to two digits after the decimal and enter this value as either a positive value or a negative value without the dollar sign.)