#macroeconomic

[221b-bitch-st]

things i think about while doing 19 homework assignments in one night (finals week baby)

i wonder if my coffee will taste good with honey

will i be able to get my assignments done if i load up on nyquil right now

if i drink coffee and take nyquil will i end up like that one kid on tumblr that time traveled through the school day

i have been working for 1 hour and i have 1 thing done, at this rate ill be done at noon tomorrow

why the fuck would i know what that means?

if i dont commit arson or murder in the next nine days ill give god $100

“hi callie!! how are you? where’s my blue boy? where are all the cats? we have five fucking cats in this house and- hi blue! hello pretty boy! aw, are you saying hi to your sister? are you being nice- no, blue, NO- goddamnit, i hate these fucking cats”

my prof gave me a 51/50 on an assignment with the comment “this is fine” im getting mixed signals

so my midterm was worth 30 points and i forgot to do it. my final is worth 30 extra credit points. so hypothetically, if i take my final, it wont matter that i forgot to take my midterm.

why the fuck would i know that.

FUCK YEAH

consider the following: shutting the fuck up

i have three major assignments due in 57 minutes im going to cry

i gave up after i finished my econ work. chemistry and algebra can suck my dick.

[jjacey-ing]

my major is economics. this is truly my childhood dream. partly because when i was a kid, i thought my dad was "cool" in business. the more I study now, the more t realize that i am quite happy to understand more about what i pursue. although i'm interested in it, i can't always understand all the knowledge I read or learn, i still struggle with Statistics and Probability, Macroeconomic, .. every day. even general grades are better than majors 😵 sometimes i don't understand the lesson very well, a moment of thought "in some parallel world, namjoon is teaching me statistics probability" again flashed in my head. =)))))))))))))))))

[developmentinformationday]

Unlocking the power of public investment to foster economic growth.

Progress toward achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) requires urgent and substantial scaling up of investment. While the estimates of the funding required to bridge these investment gaps in emerging market and developing economies (EMDEs) vary across studies, they generally amount to trillions of dollars per year. Thus, UNCTAD’s latest estimate of the aggregate investment gap faced by EMDEs to meet SDGs stands at a staggering $4 trillion per year.

Low-income countries (LICs) have particularly hefty investment needs because of their enormous infrastructure gaps in areas critical for sustainable development. For instance, in the past decade, less than one-third of the population in LICs had access to electricity and basic sanitation (figure 1.A).

These countries also face greater challenges in building resilience to climate change and meeting the green transition objectives. By some estimates, an average annual investment of as much as 8 percent of GDP through 2030 is needed to address these issues in LICs—significantly more than in other EMDEs (figure 1.B).  

Figure 1. Investment gaps in EMDEs

Sources: World Development Indicators (WDI), World Bank; World Bank (2022). Note: AEs = advanced economies; EMDEs = emerging market and developing economies; LICs = low-income countries. A. 2013-23 averages. Bars show percent of the population with access to electricity, minimally adequate drinking water, basic sanitation facilities, and the number of hospital beds available per 1,000 people. B. Estimates of the annual investment needs to build resilience to climate change and put countries on track to reduce emissions by 70 percent by 2050. Compounding these challenges, domestic investment—gross fixed capital formation—in EMDEs has been in a prolonged and broad-based slump over the past decade. Average annual growth of investment in EMDEs halved, decelerating from 10 percent per year in the 2000s to just 5 percent in the 2010s (figure 2).

Figure 2. Average annual investment growth

Sources: Feenstra et al. (2015); Haver Analytics; World Development Indicators (WDI), World Bank. Note: EMDEs = emerging market and developing economies. Investment growth averages are calculated using GDP weights at average 2010-19 prices and market exchange rates. Sample includes up to 103 economies, of which 68 are EMDEs.

Public investment can play an important role in mobilizing private capital and facilitating economic growth.

Public investment can be a powerful policy lever to help ignite growth. However, these positive effects are not guaranteed. They critically depend on conducive structural conditions. In particular, new empirical analysis suggests that the effects of public investment depend on government spending efficiency and availability of fiscal space—government’s budget resources that can be spent without jeopardizing a country’s fiscal sustainability and macroeconomic stability. While scaling up of public investment in EMDEs by one percent of GDP can increase output by up to 1.2 percent over five years, on average, in countries with ample fiscal space and efficient government spending the effect is much greater, reaching up to 1.6 percent over the same period (figure 3.A).

What’s more, public investment can play a pivotal role in catalyzing private investment and boosting productivity. In response to an increase in public investment by one percent of GDP, private investment in EMDEs can increase by up to 2.2 percent and total factor productivity by up to 0.8 percent over five years, on average (figure 3.B). This is particularly important for promoting long-run (potential) economic growth in EMDEs, which has slowed sharply and is expected to remain weak over the rest of this decade.

Figure 3. Macroeconomic effects of public investment in EMDEs

Sources: Adarov, Clements, and Jalles (forthcoming); World Bank. Note: Responses of macroeconomic variables to a public investment equivalent to one percent of GDP. Bars indicate peak responses at the 5-year horizon. A. Increase in the level of real GDP relative to the year before the shock, in percent. *** indicates statistical significance at the one-percent level. Large-fiscal space and small-fiscal space responses are based on local projections with the smooth transition function that uses the public-debt-to-GDP ratio as the conditioning variable. High-efficiency and low-efficiency samples are based on the top and bottom quartiles of the public infrastructure efficiency index (IMF 2021). B. Bars show increase in the level of private investment (gross fixed capital formation), potential output, and total factor productivity relative to the year before the shock, in percent. Whiskers indicate 90-percent confidence intervals.

Harnessing the benefits of public investment requires a comprehensive policy effort.

In EMDEs, especially in LICs, public investment efficiency tends to be substantially lower than in advanced economies (figure 4.A). With the government debt escalating to the levels above 60 percent of GDP over the last several years, their fiscal space has also decreased significantly (figure 4.B). To enable public investment and maximize its positive effects, EMDEs need to undertake wide-ranging policy reforms. While specific policy interventions depend on individual country circumstances, three overarching policy priorities are relevant for all EMDEs: expansion of fiscal space, efficiency of public investment, and enhanced global support. The latter is crucial for LICs with deep structural challenges, vast infrastructure gaps, limited fiscal resources and capacity to undertake the needed reforms on their own. Coordinated financial support and technical assistance are both needed to accelerate structural reforms in these countries and help them build robust foundations for sustainable economic growth and development. These policies are discussed in detail in Chapter 3 of the June 2024 Global Economic Prospects report.  

Figure 4. Fiscal space and spending efficiency

Sources: International Monetary Fund; Kose et al. (2022); World Bank. Note: EMDEs = emerging market and developing economies; LICs = low-income countries. A. Bars show group medians of the IMF (2021) public infrastructure efficiency index. Sample includes 27 advanced economies and 93 EMDEs, of which 15 are LICs. B. Aggregates are computed as weighted averages with nominal GDP in U.S. dollars as weights. Data for the 2020s cover 2020-23. Sample includes up to 153 EMDEs, including 23 LICs.

Unlocking the power of public investment to foster economic growth

[vander-12]

The tide could be changing in private equity exit environment

Macroeconomic headwinds and interest rate hikes have impacted the exit landscape in private equity. Despite the ongoing concerns, there are indicators of recovery that suggest a more positive outlook. For more click here to read more https://www.moonfare.com/resources/blog.

[economicsassignmenthelper]

Want the best help possible with your economics assignment? Stop looking! At Economics Assignment Help, we can help you do well in school by giving you advice from experts. Our team of experienced economics experts is committed to giving you complete solutions that are made to fit your needs. No matter if you want to learn about microeconomics, macroeconomics, econometrics, or something else, we can help. Our services include thorough research, accurate analysis, and flawless formatting to make sure that your assignments stand out. Don't let complicated economic ideas stress you out. You can count on us to give you high-quality solutions that are free of plagiarism and will impress your professors. Visit www.economicsassignmenthelp.com right now and feel confident about your economics assignment!

[think-and-write]

[brendaigreda02]

Homework #1 - Macroeconomics

What in this chapter made you think about an economic concept differently than your previous beliefs?

I used to think when I heard about economics that is only focused on businesses and government regulations including goverment businesses. As I was reading, i started to understand that I actually see economy everyday of my life, more now than when I was younger. Now that I don’t depend of mom and dad I have to handle my own economy, I have to check every single prince and consider how much demand of goods would I need. I always thought economy was something bigger than just going to the market and buy a can of tomato sauce, but actually that I am truly thinking about it, economy is every aspect of our lives. Like the book said, even in every action that we do we are choosing not to do another action. For example, the time that I study macroeconomics is time that I can use it to work and get some extra money but I am not increasing my income because I choose to study to get a better job in the future. I never thought economy can be reflected on actions, I always think on the word “economy” as numbers and transactions. I remember my parents talking about decisions they needed to make “for the wellbeing of the house economy” I never thought they were talking about either save money for my college tuition or buy a better car. Economy is in every aspect of our lives since the macro of the government to the micro of a house.

2. What new questions do you have now about the US economy based on this chapter?

I always thought that US economy was an open economy with not too many regulations for business interactions, importations and exportations of the country. Now, I would like to know more about what those regulations are? And how many liberty the small and bigger businesses have to run their own business. Also, how government regulate the businesses if they want to export or import some items from other countries. I know USA have lot of interactions with for example China, which is their biggest challenge but also help them to continue with the trade-offs. Would be interesting to know more about the world economy.

Another interest point to talk about and what generates me questions is if the world bank has nothing to do with USA economy, and when the world bank acts to help USA economy if its need to.

[theshadowrealmitself]

I think a lot of Vulcans are like the “you’ve come to me with a problem, first instinct is to fix it” type to a more extreme, especially if the problem involves emotions

So when I imagine scenarios of like. a Vulcan going to the restroom during a fancy party and seeing an attractive Human crying in it, and it turns out they don’t see themselves as attractive because their date keeps complimenting everyone else a ton but only told them “nice outfit” and it got to them

And the Vulcan is just like “I have to fix this” and they start thinking of the problem like ‘Human thinks they’re unattractive > they aren’t so nothing can be done to their appearance to make them feel better > they feel unattractive because of their date > they need a better date’ and they just tell the Human “I am your date now, I will tell you how attractive you are without excessively complimenting others so that you feel inferior, so you will no longer have to experience this emotional turbulence”

And they just walk back to their table with a cute Human on their arm who looks like they were crying but is now beaming, getting together speedrun

[zvaigzdelasas]

Showing stock market tickets of boycotted companies and then celebrating a random 2-3% drop in value as a marker of a successful boycott is one of those things that online activists regularly do that rly just undermine their position of authoritativeness among anyone who's looked at the stock market more than twice

[phoenixyfriend]

Ko-fi prompt from IndigoMay:

What would be the economic impact if people could magically grow whatever food they liked? Including fodder for animals.

This is a very wide-ranging question, like... when was the magic introduced? What was the state of agriculture before that? Is this food generated from existing matter, delivered by gods, or something else?

I'm going to narrow this to:

What would happen if people could, starting tomorrow, grow any plant...

That is edible, by either humans or livestock, with appropriate treatment.

Without delay, meaning that the time sink is several minutes instead of weeks or months.

Without concerns for weather or other natural dangers like fungal infections or pests, or requirements for water or fertilizer.

Without depleting soil nutrients, so long as they have arable land to work with.

Without relying on fresh seeds or other 'raw ingredients' like leaf cuttings.

Well... let's start small.

Personal Basis - people who are not farmers

People who do not normally grow things would start angling to acquire some kind basic gardening implements. For some, like those who live in the suburbs, this would be as simple as going into the backyard. For those in cities, they'd need to get a window box or similar to use. If you have free, guaranteed fresh plant matter, that's already a good thing, but the time and care required to keep a garden alive is more than some people can manage due to work or children or housing. With immediate food that requires minimal effort, a lot of those hurdles are removed. You can grow the two tomatoes you need for dinner, and then put the pot of soil away for tomorrow.

The cost of

Personal Basis - small farmers

The obvious impacts for those who are small farmers is that people are less likely to buy their raw ingredients. Most of these small farmers would start looking into modifying their operations to do things that require processing.

Growing apples in your house for a snack is fine--if you have a pot big enough for a small tree, and a way to dispose of the wood if it's a one-time thing--but if you want applesauce or cider or pie, someone who knows how to cook or bake needs to do that part. You can grow wheat, but your chances of having the necessary tools to grind flour are slim. You can grow cashews, but fuck knows how you're going to process that without poisoning yourself! You can grow grapes on your trellis, but that doesn't mean you have the knowledge to make wine without accidentally going straight to vinegar. You can grow corn, but that doesn't mean you know the best way to dry it to make popcorn.

So small farms shift to those products that either need processing, or are part of an animal-based food. This includes things like flowers for bees. You can't really control bees, so just 'grow and go' might incite the bees to leave somehow. Maybe they can sense magic! Who knows!

Another option would be to focus on unique or heirloom things. If you go to a farmer's market, you might be going just to see all the fruits you've never encountered before. If there's an apple stand one year, and suddenly you can grow your own apples at home, then maybe what they start doing is growing unique or rare cultivars that you've never heard of, and that's their new niche. It's not that you can't grow the apples, but would you grow them if you've never heard of them? Plus, the apple stand is doing sauces and ciders now.

Mid-tier and large farms

These farms will start to focus in on large-scale crops that don't go straight to tables or cooking pots in homes. Scrap the eggplants, the cucumbers, the blueberries. Focus on:

Fruits and vegetables that are needed for popular secondary products, like tomatoes (ketchup, marinara), or oranges (juice), or corn (anything with fructose corn syrups, popcorn).

Plants that are popular but NEED processing to be edible, like coffee beans, cocoa beans, or wheat, that most people just don't have.

Plants that are needed in massive quantities for animal feed, such as alfalfa or chicken grains.

Now, I think these large farms would still be in production. We'd see a massive reduction in water usage, which is great (except for cranberries, I guess), but many of these products would still be needed in quantities that need industrial levels of processing. Someone needs to pick the oranges, to drive them to the juicing facility, the facility needs to juice and treat and preserve and bottle them, and then that needs to be driven to the store. The reduced time to grow, reduced water usage, reduced waste from natural predators or dangers, and general ability to plan things more efficiently would result in lower costs for many of these products in a truly free market... but would possibly also rise in cost as companies try to maintain a consistent flow of profit.

Sure you can make the juice at home, but what if you're already at work? There's still a demand for products; most of us can get water from a tap at home, but there are still convenience stores selling bottled water on every other corner in a big city.

I think the most interesting of these concerns would be grazing animals, like sheep, cattle, and goats. Being able to 'refresh' the grass of a single field without having to rotate the animals to new pastures once they've eaten away at one, and without damaging the nutrient profiles of the one they're staying at, means reduced deforestation or soil destabilization in agricultural areas. We'd see a fairly significant stalling of things like the decimation of Mongolia's grasslands if the goats didn't need as much grazing land.

Maintaining the meat industry would be one of the most constant sources of demand for large-scale agriculture, given that other products could go through cycles to more efficiently use land. You can grow and harvest oranges for Tropicana on Monday, grapes for Welch's on Tuesday, soy beans for Silk on Wednesday, tomatoes for Heinz on Thursday, and so on. They probably won't need more than they used to.

Meanwhile, the cows gotta eat. And eat. And eat.

Corporations

This one is fun! MONSANTO'S GONNA BE PISSED.

So, magically growing food, you don't need seeds, at least in this case. Or you can coax more product out of a seed you already have planted. You've gotten eight cycles corn out of this one stalk this season!

So Monsanto loses some of that insane seed monopoly situation.

You'd see a decrease in pesticides and anti-fungal products as agriculture speeds up a cycle by enough to prevent the spread of dangerous infestations. It's not going to kill your entire farm if you find fungus one day and have to burn it to prevent the spread. You lost one day's profit, not a full year's.

This impacts Monsanto too. Remember the Roundup debacle?

Now, to be clear, there are still plants that will rely on pesticides and anti-fungals. The premise only covers food, after all, so there are still important plants that will need longer, dedicated growing seasons.

Industry-wide shifts

Sooooooooooo a lot of the money starts to come from non-edible plants. This is your cottons, linens, hemps, latex/rubber trees, cork trees, lumber, and so on.

As the needed arable land necessary to feed humanity (and our livestock) decreases, more land is freed up for return to indigenous peoples, reclamation by nature, usage for alternate cultivation, housing, or... well, other capitalist ventures, like bitcoin mining or whatever.

On a geopolitical level, this causes some interesting shifts in places that draw their power from being 'breadbasket' nations. For instance, if you remember the start of the Russo-Ukrainian war, we saw some major pressures being placed by virtue of some countries (e.g. Lebanon, Pakistan) getting most of their wheat from Ukraine, and the war suddenly cutting off a massive portion of how they fed their people. Much of Ukraine's support, in those early days, derived from their importance as a breadbasket nation. If everyone can grown their own food, that moves the lines. Countries that are poor on space or water can stop relying on trade to survive in terms of water. Countries that rely on their agriculture to be able to trade for other things need to diversify their economies, and fast.

(Does mean that Saudi Arabia can stop using Arizona's water, though.)

The greatest shifts would come down to water usage and pollution, I think. Agriculture is currently one of the biggest contributors to the climate crisis, and the reduction of water use by farming would be a massive help. However, I'm less sure of how we'd see meat consumption change. The greater availability of fresh fruits and vegetables could result in a shift towards more plant-based diets worldwide, but just as easily we could see large agricultural corporations (and those that rely on them, like John Deere or the aforementioned Monsanto) market meat to consumers as a greater rate due to the profit margin.

Oh, also, I have a feeling that a lot of those corporations would try to get garden centers shut down, or buy out ceramic pot and planter factories. If you can't grow anything at home because you don't have a window planter, you have to buy from the store, right?

[kimblestudies]

january 22, monday

-> it hasn't stopped raining all week. forced myself to take a lot of government and economics notes.

🎧the metamorphosis, franz kafka

[economicsassignmenthelper]

Welcome to Economics Assignment Help, the premier resource for outstanding economics help! We are excited to introduce our website, where we provide a huge selection of skillfully created answers for all of your economics assignments. We promise accurate analyses, in-depth research, and flawless formatting from a team of seasoned professionals to help you excel in your coursework. We can help you with everything from game theory to econometrics to microeconomics and macroeconomics. A seamless experience is guaranteed by our user-friendly interface, and our devoted customer support team is available around-the-clock to answer any questions. With EconomicsAssignmentHelp.com, you can wave goodbye to academic stress and welcome success. Unlock your economic potential by coming to us today!

[think-and-write]