Question

УМОЛЯЮ ВАС,ПОМОГИТЕ ПОЖАЛУЙСТА,СРОЧНО,ПРОШУУУ!!! В 2000г американский конгресс с целью пополнения доходной части бюджета решил увеличить таможенные пошлины на товары из пакистана Аргентины и Южной Кореи но эксперты доказали что расходы бюджета увеличили на большую величину в связи с выплатой новых пособий на безработицу как вы объясните данный порадокс

Answer 1

Смотри, они хотели повысить бюджет с таможенного сбора на товар, но при этом малый бизнес пострадал больше всего. После чего малый бизнес потихоньку начал уходить с рынка, появились безработные люди, которые сильны в "переправой" деятельности. Т.к. политика Америки включает в себя соц помощь безработным, то из бюджета начали идти деньги к людям без работы, и эти % на соц помощь превысили процент таможенного сбора

Answer 2

Background Information

In 2000, the American Congress decided to increase customs duties on goods from Pakistan, Argentina, and South Korea in order to generate additional revenue for the budget. However, experts have shown that budget expenditures increased significantly due to the payment of new unemployment benefits. This paradox raises questions about the effectiveness of the decision to increase customs duties and its impact on the budget.

Explanation of the Paradox

The paradox arises from the fact that the decision to increase customs duties was intended to boost revenue for the budget. However, instead of generating additional income, the budget ended up incurring higher expenses due to the payment of new unemployment benefits. This unexpected outcome can be explained by several factors:

1. Unemployment Benefits: The decision to increase customs duties may have led to a decrease in imports from Pakistan, Argentina, and South Korea. As a result, businesses that relied on these imports may have faced financial difficulties, leading to layoffs and an increase in unemployment. The government then had to provide unemployment benefits to those who lost their jobs, resulting in higher budget expenditures.

2. Economic Impact: Higher customs duties can lead to an increase in the prices of imported goods. This, in turn, can reduce consumer demand for these goods, leading to a decrease in imports and potentially affecting businesses that rely on these imports. The resulting economic impact, such as reduced sales and layoffs, can contribute to higher unemployment rates and increased expenses for the government in the form of unemployment benefits.

3. Budget Projections: It is possible that the decision to increase customs duties was based on optimistic revenue projections that did not take into account the potential negative consequences, such as reduced imports and increased unemployment. If the budget projections did not accurately account for these factors, the resulting paradox could occur.

4. Unintended Consequences: Policy decisions can have unintended consequences that are difficult to predict. In this case, the decision to increase customs duties may have had unintended negative effects on the economy, leading to higher unemployment and increased budget expenditures.

It is important to note that the above explanations are speculative and based on general economic principles. Without specific information about the context and details of the decision to increase customs duties in 2000, it is challenging to provide a definitive explanation for the paradox.