🏷️ LIMITED TIME OFFER: GET 20% OFF GRADE+ YEARLY SUBSCRIPTION →
Log in
Economics
3
answers
0
watching
104
views
8 Jan 2018

Culture shock is the personal disorientation a person may feel when experiencing an unfamiliar way of life due to immigration or a visit to a new country, a move between social environments, or simply travel to another type of life. Please share a real culture shock you experienced before. If you have never traveled to another country, please share a culture shock you experienced when you met someone from another country.

Watch
3
answers
0
watching
104
views

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

Unlock all answers

Get 1 free homework help answer.
Already have an account? Log in
Share
Already have an account? Log in
Share
Jamar Ferry
Jamar FerryLv2
9 Jan 2018
Already have an account? Log in
Share

Related textbook solutions

Principles of Economics
2nd Edition, 2017
Openstax
ISBN: 9781947172364
Principles of Macroeconomics
2 Edition,
Openstax
ISBN: 9781947172388
Principles of Microeconomics
2 Edition,
Openstax
ISBN: 9781947172340

Related questions

Need help revising, and recommendation for a conclusion.

Throughout this paper is my understanding of what I have learned in class chapters 1-4, expressing my understanding and opinions. Economics is the study of how we deal with scarce resources. Microeconomics specially deals with business in the home country exclusively. This type of economics affects small businesses in the home country only. On the other hand, macroeconomics concerns our national welfare concerning trade and international business.

I believe that many things affect our economy on a microeconomics level. Things such as our understanding of our country in reflection to the world are very important. That is why we study ourselves before we study the macroeconomic principle of the world. Understanding ourselves is what microeconomics teaches us. Working from the inside out. The world is a place where there are differences in our wants and what we get. That is what makes items scarce. That is what positive economics is. Positive economics deals with what is and what we have. The other type of economics is called normative statements. This deals with what we should receive instead of what is and deserved to some extent. It's our scarce resources that determine our allocation of resources and how we use our resources and time. This is where opportunity costs come in, giving up something to do something. A successful business or country never ignores opportunity costs. We must ensure that we have a comparative advantage instead of the absolute advantage. Our resources must be used to achieve maximum output. Comparative is met when we have fewer opportunity costs to make some certain products than the other person or entity.

My initial understanding was scarcity was oil potentially running out, but we have so much of it that you can always find more with techniques such as fracking. Now it's obvious to me, one of our most scarce resources is time. You cannot avoid the 8,760 hours in a year. I understand that people have unlimited wants but limited resources. Everything has a cost and we must make a choice as we don't have unlimited farms, factories workers, etc. scarcity forces choices and this ties in with opportunity cost, for every gun made, a theft from the hungry is made.€ The opportunity cost not being used to feed the poor, but to make guns. And I find it easy to understand no one can have everything choices must be made on benefits. If I'm going to school, imp giving up making cash, as I'm giving up money for an education, I value education more. Scarcity is also related to the invisible hand. As it's an achievement that leads free markets and capitalism through competition for scarce resources.

My understanding of the invisible hand is a person neither intends to promote public interest and does not know how much he is promoting it. Only intending on his own gain. Without being his intention a person can be lead by the invisible hand to do good for society by pursuing one's own self-interest. Going into equity and efficiency the invisible hand does ensure both equity and efficiency. People work in their selfish ways to maximize profit while also contributing to the economy as a whole. It can also be argued that as the invisible hand wants to ensure efficiency, it cannot guarantee efficiency, because it can fail to produce an efficient allocation of resources, which in turn lead to a market failure. It can also be argued that it can't guarantee equity because not everyone gets a fair price. The way I like to remember efficiency is with a real-life example, like a reduction in the number of workers needed to produce a particular good for a particular amount. Equity refers to the ownership interest in an asset, for example, if a person owns a house with a market value of $800,000 and owes $100,000 on the mortgage leaving a $700,000 equity in the home.

It can be predicted that if the price of beef increases - ceteris paribus-the quantity of beef demanded by buys will decrease. In other words, if the price of beef increases, then the quantity of beef increases, then the quantity of beef demanded will decrease because all things have to be equal. In-class lecture thought me all other things remaining the same.€ Economists use ceteris paribus to determine the effect of a factor when all other factors have been held the same and helps simplify the study and get a more refined data set.

Economists deal with many issues that pertain to assuring that both a countries domestic output is efficient and that there is an effective trade balance. This means that there are a balance and limit on the amount of imports. Also, this means home production must be able to meet export demands. There are many factors that affect the production of goods and their effect on shifting the production possibilities frontier. This involves evaluating every detail including knowing the products and any close substitutes and compliments. It also involves knowing how an action or other external force will affect demand. This is called price elasticity; Substitutes are products that can replace any given product or service. An example of this would be Coke and Pepsi. The presence of substitutes affects price elasticity because if there are other options, then any change to the price or quality of the product will cause a shift of the demand curve. O course, price is a huge reason why the demand for a product decreases or increases yet it doesn't shift the curve because of the price only. This price change will cause a domino effect that will end with the shifting of the demand curve because it will cause an increase or decrease in demand of the substitute good if the price change is either lower or higher respectively. This price change serves as a catalyst that will change people's desire to spend more money on a more expensive product and that will instead choose to buy the substitute good for cheaper or buy more of the desired product. The change in the price of actual products will not shift the demand curve yet the change of the price of substitutes will because it serves to change people's purchasing behavior. On the other hand, compliments serve to boost demand when there is a decrease in price. The use of complementary goods is dependent upon another product. An example of this would be hot dogs and buns. If the price of hotdogs decreases then, conversely, the demand for hot dog buns will increase because of this change in price. In this scenario, the decrease in price will cause a positive shift in the demand curve because of people's desire and willingness to buy more buns. This is an example of a demand shifter. There are a few other demand shifters. The shifters of the demand curve are changes in expectations, disposable income, price of substitute goods and complements, tastes and preferences, and population size and composition. Changes in income affect the demand curve because if income is lower then people tend to save any extra income instead of wasting it. Disposable income is minimized and spending is lower. This also causes people to see a perceived value of things and distinguishing between what is necessary and what is a relative luxury. The lower the income, the higher the saving and avoidance to spend. An example of this would be if someone needs to buy some medication and it is relatively expensive, that doesn't mean that someone won't buy the medication just because it is expensive. It is necessary. Other factors that contribute to spending and demand are having a price ceiling and price floor. Having a price ceiling is a limit on the price of the product this is a government-imposed idea that is meant to protect consumers from unfair pricing and other conditions that may be malicious or obscure. This affects demand because if there is a price ceiling there is a limit on profit on a unit-to-unit basis. The other factor is the price floor. This price floor was created to encourage competition and affect consumers' willingness to pay because sometimes this new price may be higher than the original price. This causes a negative impact on a product that has a less than wanted perceived value. Many factors contribute to economic prosperity and certainly do help assure that information is analyzed and implemented into an economic and business plan.

1. (TCOs 2, 4, 5, 6) The idea that the assisted suicide of terminally ill patients should be allowed simply at the patient's direction reflects what type of ethics? (Points: 5)
Hobbes' State of Nature
Rand's Objectivism
Aristotle's concept of Virtue
Thomas Aquinas' concept of conscience
Socrates' concept of excellence
Question 2.2. (TCOs 1, 2, 7) What is the moral ideal of compassion? (Points: 5)
Acts of unmerited kindness
Sentiment in response to the suffering of others
Acknowledging the sufferings of others
Acts of altruism
Acts contrary to Objectivism
Question 3.3. (TCOs 1, 2) One of the common errors in Ethics is that of the double standard. The double standard consists of what? (Points: 5)
Discriminating in the application of ethical criteria based on our own preferences
Setting aside ethical criteria in special cases
Taking steps to avoid condemnation of others
Using one set of criteria for judging cases concerning ourselves and another for all others
Suspending judgment when concerned that the consequences would be too severe
Question 4.4. (TCO 2) Prescriptive language is commonly used in ethics for what reason? (Points: 5)
To indicate what is prohibited or impossible
To indicate that one choice is better than others
To show what actions are legal
To convey requirements and obligations
To indicate that there are really no choices available
Question 5.5. (TCOs 7, 8) Each person ought to do whatever will best promote his or her own interests. (Points: 5)
Utilitarianism
Kant's Categorical Imperative
Social Contract Theory
Ethical Egoism
Gilligan
Question 6.6. (TCOs 2, 4, 9) Free people are motivated toward forming social structures according to a social contract in order to overcome what problem identified by Thomas Hobbes? (Points: 5)
The need to overcome disagreements
A perpetual state of warfare
The establishment of a monarchy
Taxation to support the costs of government
Organized ways to select leaders
Question 7.7. (TCOs 3, 6) Agricultural biofuels are not properly a renewable source of energy in the environmental ethics debate. Which of the following also is not a renewable source of energy? (Points: 5)
Windmill turbines
Hydroelectric power
Tidal flow generators
Biomass waste systems
Solar cells
Question 8.8. (TCOs 3, 6, 7) Where in our course does the following phrase apply: 'The only thing good without qualification is a good will'? (Points: 5)
Personal habits of excellence according to Plato
The social contract according to Locke
Deontological ethics according to Mill
Natural law ethics according to Aquinas
Deontological ethics according to Kant
Question 9.9. (TCOs 8, 9) John Stuart Mill's theory of Utilitarianism is the most common form of ethics in use today. It is used so commonly because it belongs to which of the Primary Schools of Ethics? (Points: 5)
Care-based
Ends-based
Economy-based
Law-based
Efficiency-based
Question 10.10. (TCOs 3, 6, 7) What is the purpose of proving whether a syllogism of formal logic is 'valid'? (Points: 5)
To identify the connecting phrase 'therefore' or a synonym of it before proceeding further
To determine whether the situation described is accurate
To determine whether the premises are true before continuing
To determine whether the conclusion proceeds from the premises
To determine that there are only two premise statements in the syllogism
Question 11.11. (TCOs 1, 2) Solving a dilemma involves realizing what aspect of it? (Points: 5)
You will never be satisfied that the right choice was made
Some choices of action are more realistic than others
In deciding to choose one action, the other possible choices will be lost
Not everybody involved will be happy with the choice
There may be significant personal costs to choosing
Question 12.12. (TCOs 1, 2, 7) According to Thomas Aquinas, what ethical capacity do people of every culture naturally possess? (Points: 5)
Logical thinking
Personal virtues
Self-interest
Ability to learn lessons
Conscience
Question 13.13. (TCOs 2, 8) The single criterion for making decisions in utilitarian ethics is what? (Points: 5)
The experience of pleasure
Accounting for unintended consequences
Fiduciary interests to be honored
The amount of happiness produced
The principle to be honored
Question 14.14. (TCOs 1, 2, 5) The world view of ruthless and unending competition for property and wealth was spelled out in which of these concepts? (Points: 5)
Locke's notion of the natural state of man
Rawls' notion of the veil of ignorance
Aristotle's notion of the doctrine of the mean
Hammurabi's code of law
Hobbes' state of nature
Question 15.15. (TCOs 3, 6, 7) Which school of ethics is primarily applied as a practical matter through rights and duties? (Points: 5)
Objectivism
Normative ethics
Consequentialist ethics
Deontological ethics
Interdisciplinary ethics
Question 16.16. (TCOs 2, 7, 8) Personal development and discovery through the repetition of good acts and study of virtue characterize what ethicist? (Points: 5)
Plato
Aristotle
Luther
Augustine
Socrates
Question 17.17. (TCOs 2, 8) Professional societies with codes of ethics and conduct enforce what standard on members beyond the paying of dues? (Points: 5)
Not to engage in other businesses for profit outside of the profession
Personal standards of behavior for family members
Pricing structures for services
Non-competition among members
Meeting ethical and competency standards in order to practice within a jurisdiction
Question 18.18. (TCOs 2, 7) Aristotle's Ethical Doctrine of the Mean measured personal virtues on a scale that included the virtue itself, the excess of it, and the deficiency of it.

If the virtue is GENEROSITY, and the excess is WASTEFULNESS, what is the deficiency?

(Points: 5)
Carefulness
There is no deficiency
Being broke (having no money)
Stinginess
Moderation
Question 19.19. (TCOs 8, 9) Processes and systems designed to slow down disagreeing behavior and think situations through more deliberately are called (Points: 5)
value clarification processes.
conflict resolution systems.
objectivist tactics.
primary schools of ethics.
care-based ethics.
Question 20.20. (TCOs 1, 2) The Latin term a priori describes the origin of knowledge developed rationally, and the term a posteriori describes knowledge developed through observation and experience. What is produced through a priori rational thought that applies to ethics? (Points: 5)
Analysis systems
Principles of ethics
Concern for outcomes
Emotions
Subjective sense of identity

Let's change it up a little. You may have to dig a little for this one. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are two banking giants that have been in news because of their role in the 2008 financial crisis. Due to this many in the government believe that the two companies should be put out of business. On the other hand, there are many who believe the companies should remain as they are. See The Case For Keeping Fannie and Freddie Alive. The argument both ways is in a sales pitch for the two contrary opinions. how would you convince someone either way on the issue of Fannie and Freddie? A reference is required to support your post

On just one major piece of economic policy, President Obama and House Republicans share the same basic opinion: kill off government-backed mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

This rare bit of consensus might also prove to be a devastating mistake.

Fannie and Freddie which guarantee mortgages were placed under federal conservatorship in 2008 as the housing bust reached its apex. The firms are roughly within $42 billion of repaying the $187.5 billion they received from taxpayers, but Obama and much of Congress plan to wind them down in the belief that another federal bailout will never again be necessary.

We can't leave taxpayers on the hook for irresponsibility or bad decisions by some of these lenders or Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac,€ Obama said in a speech this month. We've got to encourage the pursuit of profit, but the era of expecting a bailout after you pursue your profit and you don't manage your risk well, that puts the whole country at risk. And we're ending those days. We're not going to do that anymore.€

But the political debate has been lopsided thus far focused on putting Fannie and Freddie into the grave, while largely ignoring what their demise could mean for homebuyers and the economy a sharp jump in interest rates, and a drop in the availability of mortgages.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) has objected to plans to end both companies.

These are the government organizations that have made homeownership so easy, Reid recently told Nevada Public Radio. I don't agree with the president. He says he wants to get rid of them. I'm going to look closely at his recommendations because on their face, I don't like them.

Mostly, economists and investors are framing the issue in the same way as Reid.

It boils down to a tradeoff between shifting risk away from the government and taxpayers, versus keeping mortgages inexpensive and widely available, said Jed Kolko, the chief economist at the real estate firm Trulia. When push comes to shove, it's hard to do both.

Their executives received outlandish bonuses during the boom, only to foist the eventual losses caused by years of mismanagement onto the public. It rightfully enables sucker punches from Capitol Hill that voters approve of, even though the rescue kept the entire housing sector alive. Of the $1.75 trillion worth of mortgages originated last year, about 90 percent were made through the federal government.

This point matters because Fannie and Freddie ensure that the housing market does not seize up during a recession, said Ken Fears, an economist for the National Association of Realtors. Even if more private capital is needed in the mortgage industry, having the government participation creates liquidity€ that keeps the entire sector operating during tough economic times, Fears said.

Lawmakers tend to assume that the markets can transition over five or 10 years to a mortgage industry with a modest government backstop, or no taxpayer support at all. Before retiring at the end of May as a managing director for bond investor PIMCO, Scott Simon said that this amounted to a fantasy.

The private market can make mortgages, but they would trade at much higher yields and the down payments would be much higher because the private market cannot make competitive, fixed-rate mortgages with 20% or less of a down payment on the loans, Simon told National Mortgage News. Most of the people who think we should shut [the GSEs] down have a pure philosophical belief and they don't care what the outcome is. Or they simply don't understand anything about how housing finance works.

Fannie and Freddie help the economy with their guarantees, Simon reasoned but exposed taxpayers to their risks by having their own investment portfolios.

As of now, all profits from both companies go to the Treasury Department, per changes made last year to the terms of the conservatorship. In the original terms, Treasury received a 10 percent dividend from Fannie and Freddie. But Fannie and Freddie are now required to fork over all of their earnings forever to Treasury, a windfall that suddenly reduced the budget deficit.

A group of investors led by the hedge fund Perry Capital challenged this arrangement in a U.S. District Court lawsuit filed last month, claiming that they deserve a share of the proceeds after taxpayers have been repaid.

Because Fannie and Freddie are now generating cash, it would in theory be possible for the government to use these profits to create a capital cushion that prevents the need for a future taxpayer bailout.

By keeping the two companies under government control, taxpayers would benefit from the sale of about $200 billion worth of equity, investors in Fannie, Freddie, and other real estate assets explained in the background. The profits would be enough to create a capital cushion to insulate against a future downturn, without having to seek capital in the private market that could push mortgage interest rates higher.

But this requires Obama and GOP lawmakers to save Fannie and Freddie, precisely what they have vowed not to do. Obama wants a government insurance fund to replace them, while Republican congressmen favor an end to any Washington involvement with guarantees.

House Financial Services Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling (R-TX) would eliminate almost all federal involvement in the mortgage market. His policy assumes that the rusty tin standard of 30-year, fixed-rate mortgages would soon fade away, as more homebuyers would settle for variable-rate mortgages. Interest rates on a 30-year, fixed mortgage currently average 4.4 percent, a figure that could instead swing violently over time depending on inflation and the Federal Reserve. When the Fed attempted to tamp down inflation between 1980 and 1982, rates soared above 16 percent with the government backstop in place.

Obama would like to preserve the 30-year, fixed-rate mortgage. He has endorsed adopting a more limited government backstop as outlined in a bipartisan Senate bill co-sponsored by Tennessee Republican Bob Corker and Virginia Democrat Mark Warner.

The Corker-Warner bill would also unwind Fannie and Freddie, bringing their dominance to an end. In their place would be private financial institutions that would pay into a government insurance fund. Mark Zandi, the chief economist for Moody's Analytics, estimated that the plan would cause mortgage rates to increase by as much as 1.25 percent in the near-term. This estimate assumes a 20 percent down payment and a credit score of 750, slightly above the current U.S. average.

But of course, lawmakers have not discussed the potential tradeoffs in the early stages of mortgage reform. Unless voters have a clearer picture of the consequences, some say it could produce the same kind of boondoggle caused by Obamacare in 2010.

I don't think there has been much of a sales job to the public on what a new mortgage finance system looks like,€ said Brian Gardner, senior vice president of Washington research at the investment bank Keefe, Bruyette & Woods. I don't think you shove this down the throat of the electorate, as we saw with the health care overhaul.

Related Documents

ECO349H5 Lecture Notes - Lecture 2: Nominal Interest Rate, Cambodian Riel, Autarky
cyancod662
ECO105Y1
Final Exam
Study Guide
ECO105Y1 Final: Revision Notes- Winter
blushwoodchuck2
ECO 2143 Chapter Notes - Chapter 8-12+18: Autarky, Externality
ambercheetah378

Weekly leaderboard

Home
Homework Help 3,900,000
Economics 400,000
Start filling in the gaps now
Log in