Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Any international business or economic smart guys want to help me with my mid-term?


Mayor Qumiby

Recommended Posts

I would have to write your term paper to answer. Some basics are Japan has gone through two "lost Decades" after stagflation led to 20 years of a recession in Japan with inflation rising to the point that Japanese banks are investing their money in UK banks that are taking advantage of situation by charging negative interest rate, ie Japan has to pay them interest for holding their money, liquidity trap is basically the economic stimulus the US did where they gave all the money bailing out the banks so they wouldn't fail and Japan has a history of similiar actions. China is argued to also be currently in liquidity trap and possibly heading for stagflation which the continued growth of their GDP has helped avoid.

I would recommend taking 3 sheets, one per country, and write down a point by point what has happened in each economy. Japan has been dealing with 20 years of issues and refers to that a "lost decades" and have basically haven't found a long term solution and is like worst case scenerio of all 3. The US had a stagflation period in 70's and overcame them eventually, but then had housing bubble and recession of 2008 which led to liquidity trap and stimulus packages and is now in recovery but with slowing GDP is risking another stagflation even with unemployment still high. China is in a period of unprecedented growth, but also has many issues. There are a lot of differences with how they arrive at many of their economic stats and the true numbers could be hiding a economy on verge of recession. For instance, their unemployment rates are cited around 5%, but only account urban numbers that register for unemployment rates, so true rates are like 10% in cities and over 20% in rural areas. also their GDP is arrived to differently. for example their new construction is counted towards new growth regardless of the fact they are constructing ghost cities with 90%+ vacancy. There is a news show called VICE that did a news story on this, I'll see if I can find it.

Write a recent economic history of the 3 countries individually and the compare contrast they are asking for will be very obvious and much easier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would have to write your term paper to answer. Some basics are Japan has gone through two "lost Decades" after stagflation led to 20 years of a recession in Japan with inflation rising to the point that Japanese banks are investing their money in UK banks that are taking advantage of situation by charging negative interest rate, ie Japan has to pay them interest for holding their money, liquidity trap is basically the economic stimulus the US did where they gave all the money bailing out the banks so they wouldn't fail and Japan has a history of similiar actions. China is argued to also be currently in liquidity trap and possibly heading for stagflation which the continued growth of their GDP has helped avoid.

I would recommend taking 3 sheets, one per country, and write down a point by point what has happened in each economy. Japan has been dealing with 20 years of issues and refers to that a "lost decades" and have basically haven't found a long term solution and is like worst case scenerio of all 3. The US had a stagflation period in 70's and overcame them eventually, but then had housing bubble and recession of 2008 which led to liquidity trap and stimulus packages and is now in recovery but with slowing GDP is risking another stagflation even with unemployment still high. China is in a period of unprecedented growth, but also has many issues. There are a lot of differences with how they arrive at many of their economic stats and the true numbers could be hiding a economy on verge of recession. For instance, their unemployment rates are cited around 5%, but only account urban numbers that register for unemployment rates, so true rates are like 10% in cities and over 20% in rural areas. also their GDP is arrived to differently. for example their new construction is counted towards new growth regardless of the fact they are constructing ghost cities with 90%+ vacancy. There is a news show called VICE that did a news story on this, I'll see if I can find it.

Write a recent economic history of the 3 countries individually and the compare contrast they are asking for will be very obvious and much easier.

C-

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that is a terrible question in all seriousness.

 

I'm with you. It's not a very specific topic question. It's kind of all over the place. Especially the research part, it seems like you could literally write about any investment and as long as you're thorough, you'd be ok. All of those countries invest all over the world in all sorts of different ways and for multiple different reasons. The only minimal effort involved would be researching current economic trends for each nation to answer the first part. Overall, it's a bad question. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • When we drafted Luke, we already had Cam, Smith, Olsen, Stewart, Deangleo, Gross, Kalil, CJ, Hardy, Beason, TD, Gamble (and maybe more I'm forgetting), we had a lot of great pieces in place. Going pure BPA for a player with Luke's potential when the LB you already have is different when you already have all those pieces in place.  Our OL right now is probably in a better shape than that team and our RBs and TE have potential compared to proven vets back then, but after that, the 2012 roster was in a far better shape than we are right now. We need a #1 WR, DEs, LBs, DBs, C, and depending who you ask a QB.  Going BPA at pick #5 when that player is a DT and your current best player on either side of the ball is a DT, seems irresponsible. If he's the only player they like that high left, then you trade back and go with position of more need at a slot that makes sense for the player while adding other picks.  If you trade back and he falls because other teams don't need/want a DT, then you consider him at that point because of the value.    
    • This sounds like the same back and forth when we drafted a LB when we already had a LB or as mentioned prior back to back DLs. I want the BPA, if it is another DT so be it. (No not a kicker/punter for those people that think they are funny))
    • I’m hoping SMU messes it all up and wins out. Imagine the SEC & BI0 would crap themselves trying to “fix” the problem.
×
×
  • Create New...