Jnu 2015 after paper

[anadi]

And yes, even a horizontal AS would be valid. Can't exclude the most obvious case, hehe.

[anadi]

I think I got - 1 and - 3. I'm not too sure though. But this seems like it.

[amalgamateking]

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

[anadi]

Possible.

[ABHI1994]

what was the correct option for variant or invariant?

On 18 May 2015 at 08:51, amalgamateking [via Discussion forum] <[hidden email]> wrote:

ok. I was confused between this option and not discont. The reason being at -1 and -3 the function isnt define (these points are not in domain). So there is no concept of checking for discontinuity/cont at points not even in the domain

---

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:

http://discussion-forum.2150183.n2.nabble.com/Jnu-2015-after-paper-tp7597002p7597049.html

To start a new topic under General Discussions, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from Discussion forum, click here.
NAML

[amalgamateking]

CONTENTS DELETED

The author has deleted this message.

[amalgamateking]

No idea. Apparently its variant (or as pointed out earlier "not invariant"). I disagree though

[anadi]

Obviously not. We can't say anything about the function beyond its domain. I must have not noticed the interval in which the function is defined. Highly likely.

[ABHI1994]

it should be invariant because then AS curve will be horizontal and output will be decided by AD curve,

correct me if iam wrong

On 18 May 2015 at 08:59, amalgamateking [via Discussion forum] <[hidden email]> wrote:

No idea. Apparently its variant (or as pointed out earlier "not invariant"). I disagree though

---

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:

http://discussion-forum.2150183.n2.nabble.com/Jnu-2015-after-paper-tp7597002p7597053.html

To start a new topic under General Discussions, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from Discussion forum, click here.
NAML

[ABHI1994]

i have one more confusion it was invariant of price or output?

On 18 May 2015 at 09:00, anadi [via Discussion forum] <[hidden email]> wrote:

Obviously not. We can't say anything about the function beyond its domain. I must have not noticed the interval in which the function is defined. Highly likely.

---

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:

http://discussion-forum.2150183.n2.nabble.com/Jnu-2015-after-paper-tp7597002p7597054.html

To start a new topic under General Discussions, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from Discussion forum, click here.
NAML

[amalgamateking]

Dont know about that question. Sorry

[anadi]

Price.

[ABHI1994]

what should be cut off this year??

On 18 May 2015 at 09:03, amalgamateking [via Discussion forum] <[hidden email]> wrote:

Dont know about that question. Sorry

---

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:

http://discussion-forum.2150183.n2.nabble.com/Jnu-2015-after-paper-tp7597002p7597057.html

To start a new topic under General Discussions, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from Discussion forum, click here.
NAML

[amalgamateking]

Yea. The denominator was (x+1)(x+3). -1 and -3 are not in the domain then obviously (function not defined at those two pts)

[amalgamateking]

Know even less about that :P I am guessing 75+ bare min. Could be 80+. Only 18 general seats afaik

[ABHI1994]

one question was from simple keynesian model in which marginal propensity to save was decreasing and investment was increasing then what we can say about saving and output??

On 18 May 2015 at 09:04, amalgamateking [via Discussion forum] <[hidden email]> wrote:

Yea. The denominator was (x+1)(x+3). -1 and -3 are not in the domain then obviously (function not defined at those two pts)

---

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:

http://discussion-forum.2150183.n2.nabble.com/Jnu-2015-after-paper-tp7597002p7597060.html

To start a new topic under General Discussions, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from Discussion forum, click here.
NAML

[amalgamateking]

Both increase. Saving as well as output

[ABHI1994]

how?

because in paper it was asked about aggregate saving?

On 18 May 2015 at 09:10, amalgamateking [via Discussion forum] <[hidden email]> wrote:

Both increase. Saving as well as output

---

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:

http://discussion-forum.2150183.n2.nabble.com/Jnu-2015-after-paper-tp7597002p7597063.html

To start a new topic under General Discussions, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from Discussion forum, click here.
NAML

[amalgamateking]

Investment rise means AD rises. MPS falls means multiplier rises. Both would result in a rise in Income enough to offset a mps fall

[ABHI1994]

govt. role?

On 18 May 2015 at 09:16, amalgamateking [via Discussion forum] <[hidden email]> wrote:

Investment rise means AD rises. MPS falls means multiplier rises. Both would result in a rise in Income enough to offset a mps fall

---

If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:

http://discussion-forum.2150183.n2.nabble.com/Jnu-2015-after-paper-tp7597002p7597065.html

To start a new topic under General Discussions, email [hidden email]
To unsubscribe from Discussion forum, click here.
NAML