If we assume marginal propensity to consume (b) is 80 % and marginal tax rate (t)is 15 %, and marginal propensity to import is 18 %, then 25 billion increase government expenditure will increase national income by 100 billion. True or false? Why?

For the last time, consider the economy described above. You won't work directly with its numbers in this question, but I'm repeating them in case it's helpful: Government purchases $1000 Transfer payments $0 (none in this economy) Net taxes = $1500 Output (income) = $8000 Consumption = $3500 Let's say the MPC 0.8 and the government gives a tax cut of $50. As a result, private savings will [ Select ) . public savings will I Select V and this [ Select) Va good idea to stimulate economic investment.

Q)If the MPC .8 and we have a 200B GDP Gap, how much will initial expenditures need to increase to bring the economy to full employment GDP.

Suppose actual real GDP is $13.37 trillion, potential real GDP is $12.33 trillion, and the marginal propensity to consume is 0.62. If we ignore price effects, by how many trillions of dollars should the government change its spending to fix the gap? (Round this to two digits after the decimal and enter this value as either a positive value or a negative value without the dollar sign.)

Suppose actual real GDP is $7.87 trillion, potential real GDP is $14.36 trillion, and the marginal propensity to consume is 0.61. If we ignore price effects, by how many trillions of dollars should the government change its lump sum taxes to fix the gap? (Round this to two digits after the decimal and enter this value as either a positive value or a negative value without the dollar sign.)

Assume taxes are zero and an economy has a consumption function of C = 0.64 (Yd) + $250.19.  What is the marginal propensity to save for this economy?  Round your answer to two digits after the decimal.

Suppose actual real GDP is $9.06 trillion, potential real GDP is $6.42 trillion, and the marginal propensity to consume is 0.59. If we ignore price effects, by how many trillions of dollars should the government change its lump sum taxes to fix the gap? (Round this to two digits after the decimal and enter this value as either a positive value or a negative value without the dollar sign.)

Assume a model where marginal propensity to save is 0.2, the marginal propensity to import is 0.1 and the marginal income tax rate is 0.2. What is the size of the expenditure multiplier?

Marginal propensity to consume = 0.8; In an economy with tax rate = 0.25 and Marginal propensity to import = 0.10, how much would an increase of 250 units in autonomous spending increase the equilibrium income level?

Suppose you are given the following information. Autonomous spending is at $3000, government spending is at $4000, investment spending is at $2000, net exports are $1000, taxes are set at $3000 and the mpc is .8 or 80%. What is the equilibrium level of output? What would happen if the government tried to balance the budget? The other day, it was announced the consumer confidence was up last month. This sounded good news bells for firms. Why? What would be affected in our equation above? Why would it matter? Suppose the government tried to balance the budget my cutting spending, what would be the equilibrium level of output? If there is “crowding out (or in)”, what else might change in your equation? What impact would that have