Author Question: If nominal exchange rates do not change, an increase in the U.S. price level relative to the foreign ... (Read 95 times)

kfurse

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 590
If nominal exchange rates do not change, an increase in the U.S. price level relative to the foreign price level represents a real appreciation of the dollar. However, if nominal exchange rates can change, is an increase in U.S. inflation relative to foreign inflation likely to cause appreciation of the dollar in the short run?
 
  What will be an ideal response?

Question 2

An important function of international institutions during times of crisis is to
 
  A) make goods nonrival.
  B) make goods nonexcludable.
  C) prevent free riding.
  D) prevent nondiscrimination.


ecabral0

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 310
Answer to Question 1

No. An increase in U.S. inflation relative to foreign inflation is likely to reduce the demand for dollars relative to other currencies. This will cause the nominal exchange rate to increase, a depreciation of the dollar relative to other currencies, and thus the effect on the real exchange rate is unclear.

Answer to Question 2

C



Related Topics

Need homework help now?

Ask unlimited questions for free

Ask a Question


 

Did you know?

People about to have surgery must tell their health care providers about all supplements they take.

Did you know?

The horizontal fraction bar was introduced by the Arabs.

Did you know?

The B-complex vitamins and vitamin C are not stored in the body and must be replaced each day.

Did you know?

Before a vaccine is licensed in the USA, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reviews it for safety and effectiveness. The CDC then reviews all studies again, as well as the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Academy of Family Physicians. Every lot of vaccine is tested before administration to the public, and the FDA regularly inspects vaccine manufacturers' facilities.

Did you know?

Although the Roman numeral for the number 4 has always been taught to have been "IV," according to historians, the ancient Romans probably used "IIII" most of the time. This is partially backed up by the fact that early grandfather clocks displayed IIII for the number 4 instead of IV. Early clockmakers apparently thought that the IIII balanced out the VIII (used for the number 8) on the clock face and that it just looked better.

For a complete list of videos, visit our video library