Professional Documents
Culture Documents
<5 / 2022>
<BDEK2203>
<FINAL EXAM>
1. (a)
i. Balanced budget
Entire public spending is equivalent to total public revenue.
Opening a trade is difficult since losses can happen quickly, but gains are frequently
spread out over time while having the potential to be much greater and more broad.
The producers that stand to lose from more liberal imports are frequently well-
organized and capable of effectively blocking changes. Additionally, when one of the
nations engaging in mutual trade liberalisation is disproportionately large, it gives
smaller nations' lobbyists the opportunity to raise the concern of being overrun by
imports from their larger partners.
In South Asia, a long history of political conflicts makes regional economic and
commercial cooperation even more difficult. In these conditions, opening up trade to
neighbours calls for strong leadership and a visionary approach to the contribution of
trade and regional integration to economic growth.
The potential losses to output and employment from more competitive neighbours
like India are the main concern of South Asian opponents of trade liberalisation.
What's absent from their reasoning are the significant long-term gains to other
economic sectors that would more than offset any short-term losses.
Consider the three main participants in this discussion: consumers, producers, and
exporters. Liberalizing trade between smaller nations would always benefit consumers
since it would provide them access to more options, higher-quality items at lower
prices, and both. The liberalisation of trade would also assist exporters in the smaller
nations by giving them access to bigger markets and more affordable inputs.
The smaller nation's producers show a mixed picture, with the more productive ones
winning and the less prolific ones losing. Increased international competition puts
pressure on manufacturers to improve productivity and efficiency. Businesses that are
unable to increase productivity risk being driven off the market. However, this might
be offset by other businesses that gain from the availability of better and less
expensive inputs, increasing their capacity to compete both domestically and
internationally.
Governments may demonstrate better leadership and more preparation for the
transition process by having a more comprehensive understanding of the winners and
losers resulting from mutual trade liberalisation with adjacent nations. The
liberalisation process can be gradually introduced over a credible and limited time
frame for important industries where there are worries about significant job
displacements. On the other side, initiatives to increase competitiveness can be put
into place as a top priority in order to fully benefit from market access (and also better
resist increased import competition). With several countries in South Asia having just
had elections, the new administrations there may utilise their political capital to make
more audacious decisions that expand bilateral economic cooperation and hasten the
spread of wealth.
b. The national security argument, the endless industry argument, and the dumping
argument are three reasons in favour of trade barriers. We will discuss each of these
arguments and assess whether it has any merits similar to anything in life. There are
some industries within the economy that should be safeguarded from foreign
corporations because they are crucial to maintaining output in the event of national
emergency. These reasons are no different, and the national security argument is no
exception. Therefore, they may be items like those in the wale sector since we still
require these companies to operate during a national emergency to provide military
equipment, etc. The nation should be self-sufficient because, in the event of an
emergency, relying on someone else might have negative consequences, which is
what the national security rationale seeks to avoid. Due to this region, a country sets
various restrictions on foreign businesses in order to prevent their expansion in the
domestic market. Therefore, a would be higher if one of the paws on this one paw one
important were to be. Prices may really be lower if you purchase that thing elsewhere.
There are new industries emerging with time, economy, or technological
advancement, and because these companies are new, they may need to charge a
higher price than they would otherwise. This is because we don't want to rely on
foreign industries for that good, so we impose those barriers, such as a tear of, or
possibly a quota, which results in us paying a higher price than we otherwise would
without those barriers. That's already well-established from someplace else could
charge, and the reason they have to charge more as a new business is that they're still
getting started, have start-up costs to pay for, and they might not be as efficient as
they are. We know this from life when we learn things when we first learn anything
we're not as good, it is as we are after, but efficiency takes time, there's a learning
process involved, right? We put in a lot of practise and eventually master it. The baby
industry argument defends fledgling enterprises by using measures like trade
restrictions, tariffs, and chotas to shield them from competition and allow them time
to grow. These obstacles typically have a time limit, but this provides the new
industries time to establish themselves and become productive so they can compete on
a larger scale. What's going on here? Well, the fall we've previously witnessed is a
rise in pricing. The argument about emerging industries is meant to defend companies
that are already well-established elsewhere. They are already proficient at doing this
elsewhere. They require protection because of this. They wouldn't be able to compete
if we didn't protect these because if that new company offers the product for $5 but I
can get it over here from company b for $3, I'm going to purchase it from company b
and company a that's new is out of business. I'm paying $5 for a thing now because
we're protecting business A because we think they're going to fail and we want to give
them time to develop. We will soon be paying some higher pricing because I could
have purchased it for $3. So that they may compete on a global scale of markets, we
safeguard that firm and let them build themselves. In order to attract customers or
maximise profit, foreign companies may sell their products for less on the global
market than they would charge domestic consumers. So the dumping argument
basically says: let's say there is a company: they want new business, so they're just
going to get rid of this product Line they're going to dump it into the market, that's
why it's called the dumping, just dumping it on to the market of of cheap fox to gain
customers. If they're using the strategy to attract customers, they're probably going to
be trade barriers put in place to parent this. What then is the fault in this? In any case,
if suddenly we have companies a and b, a and b normally sell his items for the same
price. Okay, so maybe they sell it for $3 and often purchase it from business A
because, you know, it could be quicker, but not all of them. Company B is going to
sell the identical product for a dollar and simply flood the market with it in order to
attract more customers. Since it's now less expensive, I'm going to buy it from
business B as well as company A, when they were both selling them for the same
price and were in direct competition with one another. The problem with this is that it
might push established firms or market lines out of business since company A would
struggle and may eventually succeed. It may force companies off the market. So, as
we can see, each of these arguments has merit, but they do fall short occasionally, just
like other things in life. The national security argument, the endless industry
argument, and the definitive argument all have one weakness in common.
PART B
1. Objectives
In order to control the liquidity in the financial system, the Bank conducts
wholesale and interbank market transactions known as monetary policy
operations. Such operations' main goal is to maintain the ringgit interbank
money market's average overnight interbank rate (AOIR) within the Overnight
Policy Rate (OPR) range established by the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC)
while ensuring the smooth operation of the traditional and Islamic interbank
money markets.
Create and Print Currency
The Central Bank is in charge of creating the money required to guarantee the
efficient operation of business and industry operations. The Central Bank will
decide how much money will ultimately need to be produced on occasion in this
regard.
Government's banker and financial advisor
The Central Bank serves as the government's primary financial institution. All
payments and revenue collections related to government spending and income
flow via the Central Bank since it administers government accounting.
Additionally, the Central Bank handles the country's debt by securing loans
from both domestic and foreign lenders. It also counsels the government on
loan plans, including the terms and timing of loan security as well as the
creation of new kinds of securities.
Commercial banks and other financial institutions' bankers