Here are the answers with discussion for this Weekend’s Quiz. The information provided should help you work out why you missed a question or three! If you haven’t already done the Quiz from yesterday then have a go at it before you read the answers. I hope this helps you develop an understanding of Modern…
Saturday Quiz – June 16, 2012
Welcome to the Billy Blog Saturday quiz. The quiz tests whether you have been paying attention over the last seven days. See how you go with the following questions. Your results are only known to you and no records are retained.
Quiz #169
- 1. If austerity led to all national governments simultaneously running public surpluses (which is the aim) then it would be impossible for all their respective private domestic sectors to spend less than they earn.
- False
- True
- 2. When the government matches its deficit with debt-issuance which drains private sector purchasing power this is equivalent to a leakage from the expenditure system (akin to taxation, saving or imports) which reduces the expansionary impact of the government deficit spending.
- False
- True
- 3. National income would rise each year even if the workers, as part of a employment guarantee program, were engaged to dig large holes and fill them in again on a daily basis.
- False
- True
- 4. Which budget deficit outcome is the least expansionary?
- (a) 1 per cent of GDP
- (b) 2 per cent of GDP
- (c) 3 per cent of GDP
- (d) Cannot say, it depends on the decomposition of the structural and cyclical components.
- 5. Premium Question: If the government reduces its net spending by say $10 billion, the net financial assets destroyed by this fiscal withdrawal could be replaced by the central bank engaging in a $10 billion quantitative easing program.
- False
- True
Sorry, quiz 169 is now closed.
You can find the answers and discussion here
Question 5 : Premium Question: If the government reduces its net spending by say $10 billion, the net financial assets destroyed by this fiscal withdrawal could be replaced by the central bank engaging in a $10 billion quantitative easing program.
False, for sure. Yet, with a quantitative easing purchasing Abacus, the record Goldman Sach’s subprimes derivative recording a whooping 96 % of default, without a haircut, the answer could be very close to “true”.