Dada uma equação diferencial de segunda ordem !$ { \large d^2y \over d^2t} + a { \large dy \over dt} + by = c !$. Onde !$ c \ne 0 !$, diga se a afirmação seria verdadeira ou falsa.

Item 3: Se !$ y_1(t) !$, !$ y_2(t) !$ e !$ y_3(t) !$ são soluções, então !$ y_4(t) !$ definida como !$ y_4(t) = y_1(t) - y_2(t) + y_3(t) !$, também é uma solução.

Tendo em vista um mercado em concorrência perfeita, e supondo um aumento exógeno da demanda, a partir de um equilíbrio inicial, pode-se dizer que no equilíbrio de longo prazo:

Item 3: Não havendo nem economias nem deseconomias externas, o preço de mercado no longo prazo é determinado apenas pela demanda.

Supondo uma empresa monopolista, seja por concessão do governo ou naturalmente originado por economias de escala na produção, é possível afirmar que:

Item 0: Se a empresa for maximizadora de lucros e se defrontar com custos crescentes, ela sempre ganhará maiores lucros ao elevar o preço que pratica.

ECONOMIC GROWTH

As long as the fruits of economic growth are taken in the form of higher income, economic growth will be accompanied by increases in the mean of the income distribution. However, poverty will not necessarily decrease if growth is accompanied by a sufficiently large, offsetting increase in inequality. Unfortunately the impact of growth on inequality is not nearly as clear, either theoretically or empirically, as its impact on the mean of the distribution.

Growth and the distribution of income are the joint results of a complicated set of underlying economic processes, reflected in changes in supplies of and demands for factors of production. Arguments that inequality is necessary for growth or that growth necessarily reduces inequality ignore the process generating growth and inequality simultaneously. Any correlation between these two variables is likely to be spurious - it is not growth per se, but how that growth is achieved, which determines inequality.

Technological change and increases in the supply of labor or capital offer two routes to economic growth. They are, however, not on equal footing. Since the amount of labor or capital cannot be increased indefinitely, only technological change can offer a permanent increase in the rate of growth of output. The two also differ in the ways in which they affect the distribution of income.

Technological change may increase or decrease inequality. The initial impact of technological change is to alter the demands for labor and capital. This in turn changes prices, which may call forth a supply response as workers flow to those jobs for which demand and, hence, wages are greater.

While technological change may increase the demand for all skill classes, this is by no means necessary. The result may be an increase in both economic growth and poverty. For example, a labor-saving technological change may lower the demand for low-skilled workers. The resulting decrease in wages of those at the bottom of the distribution will have two effects - some workers will drop out of the labor force, while others will be induced to gain skills in response to the drop in the relative wages of unskilled workers. Whether or not poverty increases depends on the relative magnitude of these two changes.

DANZIGER, Sheldon, GOTTSCHALK, Peter. Increasing inequality in the United States: what we know and what we don’t. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, New York, 11(2): 181-182, 1988-89.

As found in the first paragraph, the phrase “as long as” can be translated as:

Item 4: Enquanto que.

Com relação à demanda de um insumo variável de produção, pode-se afirmar que:

Item 0: A curva de demanda sempre corresponde ao valor do produto marginal, seja o produto vendido em concorrência ou monopólio, e mesmo se a empresa utilizar mais de um insumo de produção.

Quando a função de produção é homogênea de grau 1:

Item 1: No longo prazo, o custo médio é sempre superior ao custo marginal, abaixo da escala de custo mínimo.

Uma economia oligopolizada se comporta nos termos do modelo de Kalecki. Especificamente, o produto real Y se divide entre a parcela !$ { \large 1 \over 1 + m} Y !$ pertence aos trabalhadores e a parcela !$ { \large m \over 1 + m} Y !$ pertencente aos capitalistas. No caso, m é a margem de lucro, determinada pelo grau de oligopólio na economia. Os trabalhadores consomem toda sua renda. A despesa dos capitalistas, que inclui consumo mais investimento é dada por:

!$ c { \large m \over 1 + m} y + A !$

onde A é uma constante positiva, e 0 < c < 1, o que significa que a propensão marginal a consumir dos capitalistas é menor do que 1. Admita que o limite de capacidade de produção da economia seja !$ \overline{Y} !$, e que o governo, através de um órgão tipo CIP, resolva controlar m. Nesse caso:

Item 4: O modelo de Kalecki ajuda a interpretar tanto a euforia inicial quanto o fracasso do Plano Cruzado.

Dados os conjuntos A = {1, 2, 3, 4} B = {1, 3, 5} C = {0} determine quais das seguintes afirmações são verdadeiras ou falsas

Item 3: (A!$ \cup !$B) X (A!$ \cap !$B) = (A!$ \cap !$B) X (A!$ \cup !$B).

A respeito da concorrência perfeita.

Item 3: É um fenômeno inexistente no mundo capitalista.

ECONOMIC GROWTH

As long as the fruits of economic growth are taken in the form of higher income, economic growth will be accompanied by increases in the mean of the income distribution. However, poverty will not necessarily decrease if growth is accompanied by a sufficiently large, offsetting increase in inequality. Unfortunately the impact of growth on inequality is not nearly as clear, either theoretically or empirically, as its impact on the mean of the distribution.

Growth and the distribution of income are the joint results of a complicated set of underlying economic processes, reflected in changes in supplies of and demands for factors of production. Arguments that inequality is necessary for growth or that growth necessarily reduces inequality ignore the process generating growth and inequality simultaneously. Any correlation between these two variables is likely to be spurious - it is not growth per se, but how that growth is achieved, which determines inequality.

Technological change and increases in the supply of labor or capital offer two routes to economic growth. They are, however, not on equal footing. Since the amount of labor or capital cannot be increased indefinitely, only technological change can offer a permanent increase in the rate of growth of output. The two also differ in the ways in which they affect the distribution of income.

Technological change may increase or decrease inequality. The initial impact of technological change is to alter the demands for labor and capital. This in turn changes prices, which may call forth a supply response as workers flow to those jobs for which demand and, hence, wages are greater.

While technological change may increase the demand for all skill classes, this is by no means necessary. The result may be an increase in both economic growth and poverty. For example, a labor-saving technological change may lower the demand for low-skilled workers. The resulting decrease in wages of those at the bottom of the distribution will have two effects - some workers will drop out of the labor force, while others will be induced to gain skills in response to the drop in the relative wages of unskilled workers. Whether or not poverty increases depends on the relative magnitude of these two changes.

DANZIGER, Sheldon, GOTTSCHALK, Peter. Increasing inequality in the United States: what we know and what we don’t. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics,New York, 11(2): 181-182, 1988-89.

Still in the fifth paragraph, the authors indicate that:

Item 1: wages for low-skilled workers will necessarily increase with technological change.