Sorry for the late response from us. We are still in the middle of a hectic situation here. Some of us still dizzy with incoming exams, while others have to write some new and academically provoking idea of research questions. Therefore, we would like to share some of our "kusut-ness":D.
Monetary Economics :
1. Is it theoretically and empirically effective to have one currency for Indonesia under decentralization era?
fact :
"In Europe, in order to have a good and stabile one currency policy under different fiscal policies, there are some major consideration. Quite same fiscal deficits, slightly homogenous rate of inflation are some of main consideration"
2. Is it relevant to argue the ineffectiveness of the monetary policy in Indonesia
Fact :
"Theoretically, monetary policy is not effective under different specific shocks across regions. For instances, the tsunami catastrophy in Aceh Province , Social conflicts in Maluku and Papua, etc. All of these lead to different shocks, that implies to a different rate of inflation as ultimate monetary goal of central bank."
Development Economics :
We would expect that LDCs should have a better level of health in order to get a higher economic growth, thus, a faster rate of convergence. Unfortunately, under TRIPS agreement, poor country are forced to pay higher price for drugs. Is it fair for both developed and developing countries?
Industrial Organization :
1. Theoretical research of Cartel Stability seems to omit the existence of consumer behaviour in their analysis. Intuitively, we could see that the more searching the consumers are, the less stabile the cartel is. (The previous literatures on cartel stability argument implicitly -not explicitly !!!- assuming that the consumer search intensively (perfectly). Thus, consumers will react perfectly if there is a price changes of the good). Will cartel behave the same way if this perfect search assumption is relaxed? What is the optimal behaviour of the firm inside the cartel under the different (not perfect) search behaviour of the consumer?
2. The problem above will be more complicated if we include the Anti Trust (AA) Behaviour. If AA can detect the cartel existence differently, based on several characteristics (this is again a correction from the existence literature where most of them assume fixed probability of detection), then the cartel faced two big consideration: a. The behaviour of the consumer as mentioned in Question 1. b. The detection of the cartel from AA. How could we model cartel stabilility in this case?
Note : All questions have equal weights. You may consult your books. *Ujian mode : on !!! :P
Best Regards,
kami........
6 comments:
wiii.. keyen...
ngetes nih ceritanya?.. :P
itu mana kok gak ada fotonya?
Is it fair for both developed and developing countries under TRIPS agreement, poor country are forced to pay higher price for drugs?
for developing countries, the simple answer is 'not fair'! the complex answer is 'it is fair, but...'. it is assumed that property right would increase investment as the right becomes secure,the private sectors have willingness to do more research for product development. the problem is when the health is very important for the economic growth, the increase of drug price would hamper the health development. for some countries, the basic health hasn't been achieved like most in african coutries, malaria is the worst killer (ref. sachs). hence, in this case the poor cant afford the medicines to cure malaria if the price is set too high. how can we expect to improve health situation if the people cant afford for the proper medicines for their diseases? if 'kicking the ladder of development' (ref. ha-joon chang) would be a case, then developed countries would not let the development happening in developing world. this would lead to the second answer that not all the drug should be put in the list of the TRIPS, some of them should be available in cheap price especially which deal with common disease such as malaria. we reach two concession, private company still get opportunity for making profit, the second, health is improve. but there is no free lunch in this world, isnt it? will the company invest for the cheap drug's price? should the private be compensated? or the other way around, should the people be compensated then?
an innocent face? wufff.. thanks for the compliment :-)) glad to be innocent kekeke
everyone knows that multiple effects stimulated by the central bank when it regulate anything..not only the inflationary effects, but also the growth rate..each regions in Indonesia has its own characteristics, and it respond differently.but that's doesn't make the monetary policy ineffective..for me monetary policy effect is not as significant as fiscal policy, because of the effects of monetary policy, to the growth in regions really connected with the industries in the regions. if there is large industries which capital intensive and highly dependent with the interst rate.
Post a Comment