Sub part (a):
The nominal and real
Sub part (a):
Explanation of Solution
The GDP is the summation of the monetary value of all the goods and services produced within the political boundary of a country, within a financial year. There are two different ways of calculating the GDP of the economy and they are the real GDP and the nominal GDP. The real GDP is the GDP calculated at the constant prices. There will be a base price index and the value of goods and services will be calculated on the basis of the constant prices. Thus, it will measure the GDP of the economy on the same base year price index, which will help us to identify the inflation in the economy. The nominal GDP is the GDP calculated at the current prices. The GDP will be calculated by multiplying the quantity of goods and services produced with the current year’s market prices which will include the inflation impact.
The nominal GDP of the economy can be calculated by multiplying the quantity produced by the per unit price of the commodity. The quantity produced and price in 2016 was 100 quarts of milk and 50 quarts of honey. The prices were $1 and $2 respectively, for each quart. Thus, the nominal GDP of 2016 can be calculated as follows:
Thus, the nominal GDP of 2016 is $200.
Similarly, the quantity produced and price in 2017 was 200 quarts of milk and 100 quarts of honey. The prices were $1 and $2, respectively. Thus, the nominal GDP of 2017 can be calculated as follows:
Thus, the nominal GDP of 2017 is $400.
Similarly, the quantity produced in 2018 was 200 quarts of milk and 100 quarts of honey but the prices increased to $2 and $4, respectively. Thus, the nominal GDP of 2018 can be calculated as follows:
Thus, the nominal GDP of 2018 is $800.
The real GDP can be calculated by multiplying the quantity produced with the base year price level. Since the base year is 2016, the nominal GDP of 2016 will be equal to the real GDP of 2016, which is equal to $200.
In the case of 2017, the real GDP can be calculated by multiplying the 2017 quantity with the 2016 price as follows:
Thus, the real GDP of 2017 is $400.
In the case of 2018, the real GDP can be calculated by multiplying the 2018 quantity with the 2016 price. Since there is no change in the quantity produced in 2018 and 2017 in the two commodities of milk and honey, there will be no change in the real GDP of the two years and thus, the real GDP of 2018 will be the same as 2017, which is $400.
The GDP deflator is the implicit price deflator. It can be calculated by dividing the nominal GDP with the real GDP and multiplying the value with 100 as follows:
Thus, by substituting the values of nominal and real GDP in the equation, we can calculate the GDP deflator as follows:
Thus, the GDP deflator in 2016 is 100. Similarly, the GDP deflator for 2017 can be calculated as follows:
Thus, the GDP deflator in 2017 is also 100.
The GDP deflator for 2018 can be calculated as follows:
Thus, the GDP deflator in 2018 is 200.
These values can be tabulated as follows:
Table 1
Year | Nominal GDP | Real GDP | GDP Deflator |
2016 | $200 | $200 | 100 |
2017 | $400 | $400 | 100 |
2018 | $800 | $400 | 200 |
Concept introduction:
Gross Domestic Product (GDP): It is the summation of the monetary value of all the goods and services produced within the political boundary of a country, within a financial year.
GDP deflator: It is an implicit price deflator.
Sub part (b):
The Percentage change in nominal and real GDP and GDP deflator.
Sub part (b):
Explanation of Solution
The percentage change in nominal GDP can be calculated by the following formula:
Thus, by substituting the values for the current year and previous year, we can calculate the percentage change in the nominal GDP as follows:
Thus, the percentage change in nominal GDP of 2017 is 100 percent.
Thus, the percentage change in nominal GDP of 2018 is also 100 percent.
Similarly, the percentage change in real GDP and GDP deflator can be calculated as follows:
The percentage change in real GDP of 2017 is 100 percent.
The percentage change in real GDP of 2018 is 0 percent.
The percentage change in the GDP deflator can be calculated as follows:
Thus, the percentage change in GDP deflator of 2017 is 0 percent.
Thus, the percentage change in GDP deflator of 2018 is 100 percent.
The prices in the economy remain the same in the year 2016 and 2017, which leads to no change in the percentage change in the GDP deflator. This is why the GDP deflator percentage change is zero. Similarly, the output levels remain the same in the years 2017 and 2018, which leads to the value of percentage change in the real GDP to remain at zero.
Concept introduction:
Gross Domestic Product (GDP): It is the summation of the monetary value of all the goods and services produced within the political boundary of a country, within a financial year.
GDP deflator: It is an implicit price deflator.
Sub part (c):
Economic well-being.
Sub part (c):
Explanation of Solution
The economic well-being increased much larger in the year of 2017, when compared to 2016 and 2018. This result is obtained from the analysis of the data that the real GDP remained the same in 2018 as the real GDP in the 2017. Thus, there were no changes in the real GDP after 2017. But after 2016, the real GDP increased from $200 to $400 in 2017. This means that the well-being rose more in 2017. Another reason why the well-being didn’t rise in 2018 was the price hike. The output remained the same, whereas prices doubled.
Concept introduction:
Gross Domestic Product (GDP): It is the summation of the monetary value of all the goods and services produced within the political boundary of a country, within a financial year.
Want to see more full solutions like this?
Chapter 15 Solutions
Essentials Of Economics, Loose-leaf Version
- answerarrow_forwardDiscuss the preferred deterrent method employed by the Zambian government to combat tax evasion, monetary fines. As noted in the reading the potential penalty for corporate tax evasion is a fine of 52.5% of the amount evaded plus interest assessed at 5% annually along with a possibility of jail time. In general, monetary fines as a deterrent are preferred to blacklisting of company directors, revoking business operation licenses, or calling for prison sentences. Do you agree with this preference? Should companies that are guilty of tax evasion face something more severe than a monetary fine? Something less severe? Should the fine and interest amount be set at a different rate? If so at why? Provide support and rationale for your responses.arrow_forwardNot use ai pleasearrow_forward
- For the statement below, argue in position for both in favor or opposed to the statement. Incompetent leaders can't be ethical leaders. Traditional leadership theories and moral standards are not adequate to help employees solve complex organizational issues.arrow_forwardpresentation on "Dandelion Insomnia." Poemarrow_forwardDon't used Ai solutionarrow_forward
- "Whether the regulator sells or gives away tradeable emission permits free of charge, the quantities of emissions produced by firms are the same." Assume that there are n identical profit-maximising firms where profit for each firm is given by π(e) with л'(e) > 0; π"(e) < 0 and e denotes emissions. Individual emissions summed over all firms gives E which generates environmental damages D(E). Show that the regulator achieves the optimal level of total pollution through a tradeable emission permit scheme, where the permits are distributed according to the following cases: Case (i) the firm purchases all permits; Case (ii) the firm receives all permits free; and Page 3 of 5 ES30031 Case (iii) the firm purchases a portion of its permits and receives the remainder free of charge.arrow_forwardcompare and/or contrast the two plays we've been reading, Antigone and A Doll's House.arrow_forwardPlease answer step by steparrow_forward
- Suppose there are two firms 1 and 2, whose abatement costs are given by c₁ (e₁) and C2 (е2), where e denotes emissions and subscripts denote the firm. We assume that c{(e) 0 for i = 1,2 and for any level of emission e we have c₁'(e) # c₂' (e). Furthermore, assume the two firms make different contributions towards pollution concentration in a nearby river captured by the transfer coefficients ε₁ and 2 such that for any level of emission e we have C₂'(e) # The regulator does not know the resulting C₁'(e) Τι environmental damages. Using an analytical approach explain carefully how the regulator may limit the concentration of pollution using (i) a Pigouvian tax scheme and (ii) uniform emissions standards. Discuss the cost-effectiveness of both approaches to control pollution.arrow_forwardBill’s father read that each year a car’s value declines by 10%. He also read that a new car’s value declines by 12% as it is driven off the dealer’s lot. Maintenance costs and the costs of “car problems” are only $200 per year during the 2-year warranty period. Then they jump to $750 per year, with an annual increase of $500 per year.Bill’s dad wants to keep his annual cost of car ownership low. The car he prefers cost $30,000 new, and he uses an interest rate of 8%. For this car, the new vehicle warranty is transferrable.(a) If he buys the car new, what is the minimum cost life? What is the minimum EUAC?(b) If he buys the car after it is 2 years old, what is the minimum cost life? What is the minimum EUAC?(c) If he buys the car after it is 4 years old, what is the minimum cost life? What is the minimum EUAC?(d) If he buys the car after it is 6 years old, what is the minimum cost life? What is the minimum EUAC?(e) What strategy do you recommend? Why? Please show each step and formula,…arrow_forwardO’Leary Engineering Corp. has been depreciating a $50,000 machine for the last 3 years. The asset was just sold for 60% of its first cost. What is the size of the recaptured depreciation or loss at disposal using the following depreciation methods?(a) Straight-line with N = 8 and S = 2000(b) Double declining balance with N = 8(c) 40% bonus depreciation with the balance using 7-year MACRS Please show every step and formula, don't use excel. The answer should be (a) $2000 loss, (b) $8000 deo recap, (c) $14257 dep recap, thank you.arrow_forward
- Economics (MindTap Course List)EconomicsISBN:9781337617383Author:Roger A. ArnoldPublisher:Cengage LearningMacroeconomics: Principles and Policy (MindTap Co...EconomicsISBN:9781305280601Author:William J. Baumol, Alan S. BlinderPublisher:Cengage Learning
- Principles of Economics, 7th Edition (MindTap Cou...EconomicsISBN:9781285165875Author:N. Gregory MankiwPublisher:Cengage LearningEssentials of Economics (MindTap Course List)EconomicsISBN:9781337091992Author:N. Gregory MankiwPublisher:Cengage LearningPrinciples of Economics (MindTap Course List)EconomicsISBN:9781305585126Author:N. Gregory MankiwPublisher:Cengage Learning