HFWR
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso) Give me a forum ...
A hunnert percent!
20/20. Not a single question seemed anything other than obvious. There was a clear bias towards free market economics to keep in mind and, as always, it was important to not read anything into the questions. ...
Economic Literacy Test Results
from 03/26/2013 to 03/26/2015
Total Participants: 106,649
Average Score: 14 out of 20 for a 70 %
Average Age: 24
Gender: Females - 44
Males - 50,028
Education Level: Grade School - 7,936
High School - 50,169
1-2 years of college - 16,070
4 years of college - 15,792
Graduate School - 12
Employment Status: Employed - 59,972
Unemployed- 24
Bah. only 95%, but [initially] disagree with the scoring (question 16). [On second thought, the government workers do benefit as well--as long as one doesn't net out the inefficiencies, the answer postulated is correct, I suppose.]
16. When governments supply products and services, these products and services usually benefit:
A. More than one person at a time whether they have paid for it or not.
B. Only the people who pay for these products and services.
C. Business at the expense of consumers.
D. Don't Know.
But which did you choose? I could see "none of the above" (hope that's not getting too political!), but otherwise, what would be more correct than "A"?
-ERD50
But which did you choose? I could see "none of the above" (hope that's not getting too political!), but otherwise, what would be more correct than "A"?
-ERD50
Exactly, you have to consider that the test was one about economics, not food preferences.
I thought they were all obvious as well, but I still brain-glitched on the last one. My reading comprehension was fine, they were looking for the wrong answer, but as I analyzed them, my brain switched to looking for the right one, so by getting it wrong, I was right. Kind of.
The other question that tripped me was employed/unemployed - no 'retired'. Yes, that's unemployed, but for the apparent use of comparing to your peers, are retired and unemployed the same peer group?
This was interesting:
1000:1 ratio M/F! And how do all those working people have time to take a test?
-ERD50
20/20. Not a single question seemed anything other than obvious. There was a clear bias towards free market economics to keep in mind and, as always, it was important to not read anything into the questions. For example, question #1 did NOT say that an increase in the number of fast food restaurants would result in "high quality" food. It said an increase in the number of fast food restaurants would result in "higher quality" food, a relative term. And that's true. An increase in competition generally results in the competitors lowering prices and trying to increase customer satisfaction in order to maintain market share. This is true whether you're talking fast food or auto body repair.
I believe the answer was simply "higher quality and lower prices". No mention of food, so I assumed higher quality service.
Competition tends to drive businesses to improve quality and/or lower prices. Less competition usually means businesses can raise prices and reduce quality and still maintain market share/volume.
But which did you choose? I could see "none of the above" (hope that's not getting too political!), but otherwise, what would be more correct than "A"?
Same here, and I agree with your first impression. Since the gov't is the business doing the (probably incredibly inefficient) producing, only it receives a benefit.
I would generally agree with that. What immediately comes to mind is that it's to bad we don't have more competition in satellite/cable TV services industry.
Same here, and I agree with your first impression. Since the gov't is the business doing the (probably incredibly inefficient) producing, only it receives a benefit.
That's my answer, and I'm sticking with it.
95%. I got question 1 wrong. But then I don't like fast food!
20 for 20. And the summary statistics do look a wee bit odd. I was one of only 24 'unemployed' people out of 60,000?
The one I missed was #3. How much interest "banks CHARGE" would not encourage people to save more. How much interest they PAY would. Poorly worded.