英文论文代写

美国代写report:供需模型

美国代写report:供需模型

根据塔克(Tucker,2012,p。404),收入模型的循环流动显示了企业与家庭之间的货币,资源和产品的流动。图中的一半显示了产品市场和其他要素市场。在产品市场上,企业以货币和要素市场的形式出售商品和服务给家庭,企业需要资源,资本,劳动力和制造商品和服务所需的其他因素。在产品市场中,供需模型决定了交换的商品的价格和数量。在要素市场中,相同的模型决定了要求因素的回报。因此,商品和服务在一个方向上流动,而在循环流图中另一个相关的支付流(Tucker,2012,p.405)。

问题(i)

当澳大利亚政府购买美军飞机时,这是一个净撤出。一般来说,政府会以税收,关税等形式为经济支出(军队和其他所有人)提供资金。因此,为了购买军用飞机并加强防御,澳大利亚政府将从澳大利亚的家庭,但不会有任何交换。澳大利亚企业还没有获得任何注资,但这是美国飞机业务,在这种情况下,收入流入。所以这是一个净撤回。

问题(ii)

当政府的支出增加时,可以认为是有利于澳大利亚的家庭。政府反过来又通过税收和公共借款来支付这笔开支。所以既不是退缩,也不是注射。

问题 (iii)

当政府的支出增加时,这对澳大利亚家庭是有利的。政府反过来又通过税收收入和印刷更多的资金来支付这笔开支。政府已经出钱为澳大利亚家庭做些事情。没有任何付款的家庭受益。所以这是一个净注入。

美国代写report:供需模型

According to Tucker (2012, p.404), a circular flow of income model shows the flow of money, resources and products between businesses and households. One half of the figure shows product markets and the other factor markets. In product markets, the firms sell their goods and services to households in exchange for money and in factor markets, the businesses demand resources, capital, labour, and other factors needed to manufacture their goods and services. In the product markets, the demand and supply models determine the prices and quantities of goods in exchange. In the factor market, the same models determine the returns to the demanded factors. Thus goods and service flow in one direction and the related payments flow in the other in the figure of circular flow (Tucker, 2012, p.405).

Problem (i)

When the Australian government purchases US military aircraft, it is a net withdrawal. The government, in general, raises funds, for its expenditure (military and all others) from the economy, in the form of taxes, tariffs, etc. So to purchase the military aircraft and strengthen defense, the Australian government would have collected taxes from the Australian households, but will not have given anything in exchange. The Australian businesses have not obtained any injection, but it is the US aircraft business, that has an inflow of income in this case. So this is a net withdrawal.

Problem (ii)

When the government’s expenditure is increased, it can be assumed that it is in favour to the Australian households. The government has in turn, funded this expenditure through tax revenues and borrowings from the general public. So it is neither a withdrawal nor an injection.

Problem (iii)

When the government’s expenditure is increased, it is in favour to the Australian households. The government has in turn, funded this expenditure through tax revenues and printing more money. The government has printed money to do something in favour of the Australian households. The households are benefited without any payment. So it is a net injection.