有幾題問題唔明:

1.好多的士大佬去排隊抗議van仔可以合法在機場載客,答案就係話this reveals that the tawi drivers appreciate economic rent from taking passengers at the airport currently,唔明點解會令rent上升,唔係應該transfer earning高左,所以rent應該depreciation咩??

2. 唔明點解呢句係o岩,可唔可以中文解釋一下,plx & thx! 句子係: Economic rent cannot be well-defined when the ways resources are used are not defined clearly.

3. 都係唔明點解呢句係o岩,可唔可以中文解釋一下,plx & thx! 句子係: tautology can serve as an equilibrium of a theory.

聽日就考喇,請高手幫幫我,thx!

我都係讀econ 不過係中四  你呢d冇記錯既好似係al

幫唔到你..

AL 真係好難

我之前中文讀又成年無掂過,希望幫到你啦
1.唔係好明問緊咩,介唔介打個full ver.出黎?
2.應該係因為如果無定清個source既可能用途就count唔到佢既oc,計唔到rent
3.即係tautology成立時,個theory會均衡,我記得同demand supply圖有關係,但詳情已經..
我估:tautology時a會全等於b,係d-s圖入面即係d=s,而果時就係市場既均衡(個theory可能係指交易定理?)

Economic rent cannot be well-defined when the ways resources are used are not defined clearly.
rent不能夠明確地分辨出當resources的用途不是明確地指出了

a change in income may affect the supply of the resources in a particular dimension¬hw some dimension won't be affected
i.e we have to clearly define the exact use of the resources

PLS refer to 經濟解釋~張五常話自己係大學任教時的例子

Some taxi lined up to protest against the vans taking passengers illegally at the airport. This reveals that

A. The tawi drivers appreciate economic rent from taking passengers at the airport currently
B. The capacity of vans lets drivers enjoy economies of scale in transporting passengers and luggage
C. There exists a divergence between private and social costs
D. All of the above

ANS: D

我只係唔知點解A會係o岩...

我唔係太記得呢D, 但RENT好似係利益之類的東東?

機場去市區, 多數一程可以收好多, 行李放係車尾又有錢加, 應該會係最好搵既一個線路,
我估佢所謂既CURRENLTY, 就係解呢個唔低收費而得到既RENT)
而唔係解CURRENT SITUATION (即是被VAN仔佬搶客)

如果佢地唔係覺得呢個RENT係好既(姐係唔APPRECIATE啦), 咁其實比VAN仔佬搶客, 佢地應該唔會有咩反應
但加陣佢地出黎抗議, 應該就姐係表示佢地其實幾鐘意呢個得益, 唔想失去比VAN仔佬搶?

死囉, 完全冇用經濟學既野去分析...因為真係唔太記得了

[ 本帖最後由 nishi 於 2009-6-7 06:31 PM 編輯 ]

appreciate rent應該係指taxi drivers 享有rent~
而佢地抗議即係反映出佢地仲stay係的士呢行?
還是因為佢地 d rent比 vans competed away~導致佢地不滿

我自己係咁樣理解,
當van仔可以合法到機場載人,
的士司機transfer earning上升,rent一定會depreciation currently

我覺得a個答案可能係指班的士大佬本身已經有rent,而唔係話升左?
因為佢地去抗議,自然會有cost,而有cost都咁做就證明佢地本身有rent,反之,抗議個cost同佢地做其他職業既cost(即係你講既t.e)加埋重大過佢個得益既話,佢地唔會去抗議

不過尼條係咪past paper?如果係既我想知年份同題數,對番中文版既答案係點詮釋,廢事因為我英文唔太好而誤解左

係既,我都唔否認佢地咁做已經會有rent,
但係佢地會唔會係delaying investment?
佢地希望將rent可以資本化到之後成功抗議既時侯呢?

呢份係補習社mock卷,
題題都好難...

唔太明你既意思
點解會同資本化有關係

抗議->放棄現有收入(depreciation currently)->投資換取日後取消返van仔機場接客->賺返rent