Economics Assignment on Welfare, Investment, and International Trade

This economics assignment addresses three key areas: the effectiveness of GDP as a welfare measure, the impact of interest rates on investment spending, and the role of comparative advantage in international trade. The assignment argues that GDP is an inadequate measure of welfare compared to the Human Development Index (HDI), highlighting the importance of factors beyond market transactions. It then explores the inverse relationship between interest rates and investment, demonstrating how lower rates stimulate investment and higher rates reduce it, impacting GDP growth in both Australia and the United States. Finally, the assignment explains the concept of comparative advantage, illustrating how countries benefit from specializing in goods they can produce most efficiently and engaging in international trade, using examples of trade between China and the United States. The assignment uses graphs and data to support its arguments, and references relevant economic literature.

Economics Assignment 1
ECONOMICS ASSIGNMENT
By (Student’s Name)
Professor’s Name
College
Course
Date

Economics Assignment 2
Question 1:
The GDP is ineffective welfare measure. GDP doesn’t reflect the true economy health. A
compressive measure like HDI is required since GDP fails to integrate welfare measures. GDP
solely describes the value of all finished products produced within a country over a period of
time. None of GDP’s computation method include indicators of welfare. GDP is a proxy of a
proxy measure hence lacks validity as welfare (Kubiszewski et al. 2013). It only include market
transactions but disregards voluntary/domestic work with considerable impact on welfare which
enhance living standards. GDP excludes black market transactions and unlawful activities with
adverse impacts on welfare.
In comparing the welfare of any two countries utilizing GDP per capital and the UN’s
HDI, the following two images are used in terms of literacy level. The 2006 figures can be used
to compare the GDP and HDI. Based on 2006 figures retrieved from:
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Economy/GDP , the figures indicate that United
States ranks number one with a GDP of $13.2 trillion (current USD), whereas Japan comes next
with $4.34 trillion, Germany with $2.90 trillion and China with $2.60 trillion. These countries at
the topic take the lead in terms of activities happening within their borders but doesn’t essentially
mean that their populace are better off than the remaining countries in terms of the overal
welfare.

Economics Assignment 3
HDI figures (drawn from:
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Economy/Human-Development-Index) indicate
that Norway ranks top with highest HDI of 0.963, Iceland follows with HDI of 0.956 and
Australia third with 0.955, Canada, Luxembourg and Sweden are tied at fourth position with
0.949. Niger is last with HDI of 0.281. Since HDI is relatively more detailed than GDP,
countries that ranks high in GDP take lower ranks with HDI. As US is merely rank 10th, Japan
11th, Germany 20th and China eighty-fifth. This is because HDI includes additional indicators
thereby allowing it provide a better image of state of well-being of the populace of a country.
Citizens in Norway live longer lives than US citizens. Norway has a life expectancy at birth of
82.9 years in 2006 while US life expectancy merely stood at 77.70 years.
Question 2:
The investment spending by firms is determined by the rate of interest criterion. Low
rates of interest have always stimulated the housing construction while construction is reduced
by higher rates of investment. There is a reciprocal relationship between the interest rates and the
investment in the residential establishments in both Australia and the United States. Such a

Economics Assignment 4
relationship is applicable to all forms of the investment: Higher rates of investment has a
tendency to decrease the investment quantity, whereas lower rates of interest surge investment
quantity. The investment demand curvature can be used to show an investment curvature for
economy (Gilchrist, Sim and Zakrajšek 2014). This curvature demonstrates the investment
quantity demanded at each rate of interest, holding other determinants of demand fixed. At the
lower rate of interest of r2, then demand curve for investment indicates that the investment
quantity demanded shall ascend to B a year. A decrease in the rate of interest hence triggers the
movement along the curvature of investment demand as shown below:
A graph showing effects of interest rates on investmnet in both Australia and the United States
The investment curve indicates the volume of the investment expenditure a year at every
rate of interest in both countries, Ceteris paribus other determinants of investment. The curvature
indicates that as the rate of interest declines in both Australia and the US, the investment level
per year surges. A decline in rate of interest from r1 to r2 in both countries, for instance, would
Interest rate
Investment demand curve
for both Australia and US
A
B
Investment per year
r1
r2

Economics Assignment 5
surge investment from A to B billion dollars a year, Ceteris paribus other investment
determinants.
From the above graph, the implication for behaviour of investment based on interest rate
on GDP growth is two-fold. A reduction in interest increases investment and thus increasing the
production and hence increased GPD in both Australia and the United States. On the contrary, an
increase in the rates of interest will lead to a reduction in investment thus leading to less GDP in
both Australia and United States.
Question 3:
Comparative advantage drives the international trade. It is economic law that denotes
economy’s ability to produce commodities at lowest opportunity cost than another country. A
country will decide to produce the goods it can best produce and export and import the goods it
cannot produce best (Laursen 2015).
Comparative advantage benefits the country if it is relatively efficient at producing some
goods by specialization, even when it lacks absolute advantage in its production (Costinot,
Donaldson, Vogel and Werning 2015). Simply put, despite other countries being able to
undertake the production of such commodities increasingly efficiently, an economy has to
specialize in particular commodities where the opportunity-cost of such production is lowest in
that economy (Laursen 2015).
The forgone cost describes the immediate cost of best use which might be made of
resources dedicated to the commodities’ production. Specializing in products that it produces
relatively efficiently, an economy would sell more and subsequently surge its income.
Comparative-advantage helps a company to specialize in products it is comparatively most
efficient and effective, subsequently the total national output hence the national income could be

Economics Assignment 6
surged (Laursen 2015). The country can produce more of such goods than it needs and export
them to another country whereas utilizing the proceeds from export to purchase imported
commodities that it does not produce. A country thus pushes its PPF outward hence surging its
national output.
All players (countries), at all times, are able to benefit mutually from the collaboration
alongside free trade with comparative advantage, Comparative advantage is a useful concept in
the theory of international trade. Riccardo demonstrated how Portugal (wine) and England
(clothing) benefit by specializing and trading to their comparative advantage. The comparative
advantage of China with the US is in terms of inexpensive labour. The workers of China produce
unsophisticated consumer products at very extreme lower opportunity-cost (Laursen 2015). The
US’ comparative-advantage is in specialized capital-intensive labour. The American employees
produce sophisticated products/investment opportunities at the lowest opportunity cost. Both
China and U.S. have gained by specializing as well as trading along such lines in a free-trade
between both economies.

Economics Assignment 7
References
Costinot, A., Donaldson, D., Vogel, J. and Werning, I., 2015. Comparative advantage and
optimal trade policy. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 130(2), pp.659-702.
Gilchrist, S., Sim, J.W. and Zakrajšek, E., 2014. Uncertainty, financial frictions, and investment
dynamics (No. w20038). National Bureau of Economic Research.
Kubiszewski, I., Costanza, R., Franco, C., Lawn, P., Talberth, J., Jackson, T. and Aylmer, C.,
2013. Beyond GDP: Measuring and achieving global genuine progress. Ecological Economics,
93, pp.57-68.
Laursen, K., 2015. Revealed comparative advantage and the alternatives as measures of
international specialization. Eurasian Business Review, 5(1), pp.99-115.
http://www.nationmaster.com/blog/?p=45