ARBITRAGE
It is buying an asset in one market and simultaneously selling an identical asset in another market at a higher price. Sometimes these will be identical assets in different markets, for instance, shares in a company listed on both the London Stock Exchange and New York Stock Exchange. Often the assets being arbitraged will be identical in a more complicated way, for example, they will be different sorts of financial securities that are each exposed to identical risks.
Some kinds of arbitrage are completely risk-free? This is pure arbitrage. For instance, if euros are available more cheaply in dollars in London than in New York, arbitrageurs (also known as arbs) can make a risk-free profit by buying euros in London and selling an identical amount of them in New York. Opportunities for pure arbitrage have become rare in recent years, partly because of the globalisation offinancial markets. Today, a lot of so called arbitrage, much of it done by hedge funds, involves assets that have some similarities but are not identical. This is not pure arbitrage and can be far from risk free.
Question:
After you read the article, do you think pure arbitrage is risk-free or not?
RANCANGAN AKTIVITAS TUTORIAL (RAT)
Mata Kuliah : BAHASA INGGRIS
NIAGA
Kode/SKS : SOSI4101/2
Nama Tutor : SITI ERA
MARDIANI
Deskripsi
Singkat : Matakuliah ini berisi
istilah-istilah ekonomi dalam bahasa Inggris.
Mata
kuliah
Kompetensi
Umum : Setelah menyelesaikan matakuliah ini mahasiswa
dapat memahami istilah ekonomi dalam bahasa Inggris yang dimulai dengan huruf A sampai dengan R.
|
No.
|
Kompetensi
Khusus
|
Pokok Bahasan
|
Sub
Pokok Bahasan
|
Model Tutorial
|
Tugas
Tutorial
|
Estimasi Waktu
|
Daftar Pustaka
|
Tutorial ke
|
|
I
|
Menjelaskan
beberapa istilah ekonomi yang dimulai dengan huruf A dan B
|
|
|
|
|
90 menit
|
http://www.economist.com/research/economics/alphabetic.cfm?letter=A
http://www.economist.com/research/economics/alphabetic.cfm?letter=B
|
I
|
|
1
|
menjelaskan istilah ekonomi yang dimulai dengan huruf A
|
Economic Terms from A to B
|
Economic terms started with A
|
Kajian materi
|
Membaca modul
hal. 1.2 – 1.21
|
45
menit
|
|
|
|
2
|
menjelaskan istilah ekonomi yang dimulai dengan huruf B
|
Economic Terms from A to B
|
Economic terms started with B
|
Kajian materi
|
Membaca modul
hal. 1.23 – 1.43
|
45
menit
|
|
|
|
II
|
Menjelaskan
beberapa istilah ekonomi yang dimulai dengan huruf C dan D
|
|
|
|
|
90
menit
|
http://www.economist.com/research/economics/alphabetic.cfm?letter=C
http://www.economist.com/research/economics/alphabetic.cfm?letter=D
|
II
|
|
1
|
menjelaskan istilah ekonomi yang dimulai dengan huruf C
|
Economic Terms from C to D
|
Economic terms started with C
|
Kajian materi
|
Membaca modul
hal. 1.2 – 1.34
|
45
menit
|
|
|
|
2
|
menjelaskan istilah ekonomi yang dimulai dengan huruf D
|
Economic Terms from C to D
|
Economic terms started with D
|
Kajian materi
|
Membaca modul
hal. 1.36 – 1.55
|
45
menit
|
|
|
|
III
|
Menjelaskan
beberapa istilah ekonomi yang dimulai dengan huruf E dan F
|
|
|
|
|
90 menit
|
http://www.economist.com/research/economics/alphabetic.cfm?letter=E
http://www.economist.com/research/economics/alphabetic.cfm?letter=B
|
III
|
|
1
|
menjelaskan istilah ekonomi yang dimulai dengan huruf E
|
Economic Terms from E to F
|
Economic terms started with E
|
Kajian materi
|
Membaca modul
hal. 1.2 – 1.23
|
45
menit
|
|
|
|
2
|
menjelaskan istilah ekonomi yang dimulai dengan huruf F
|
Economic Terms from E to F
|
Economic terms started with F
|
Kajian materi
|
Membaca modul
hal. 1.25 – 1.41
|
45
menit
|
|
|
|
IV
|
Menjelaskan
beberapa istilah ekonomi yang dimulai dengan huruf G dan I
|
|
|
|
|
90 menit
|
http://www.economist.com/research/economics/alphabetic.cfm?letter=G
http://www.economist.com/research/economics/alphabetic.cfm?letter=H
http://www.economist.com/research/economics/alphabetic.cfm?letter=I
|
IV
|
|
1
|
menjelaskan istilah ekonomi yang dimulai dengan huruf G
dan H
|
Economic Terms from G to I
|
Economic terms started with G
and H
|
Kajian materi
|
Membaca modul
hal. 1.2 – 1.31
|
45
menit
|
|
|
|
2
|
menjelaskan istilah ekonomi yang dimulai dengan huruf I
|
Economic Terms from G to I
|
Economic terms started with I
|
Kajian materi
|
Membaca modul
hal. 1.33 – 1.54
|
45
menit
|
|
|
|
V
|
Menjelaskan
beberapa istilah ekonomi yang dimulai dengan huruf L dan N
|
|
|
|
|
90 menit
|
http://www.economist.com/research/economics/alphabetic.cfm?letter=L
http://www.economist.com/research/economics/alphabetic.cfm?letter=M
http://www.economist.com/research/economics/alphabetic.cfm?letter=N
|
V
|
|
1
|
menjelaskan istilah ekonomi yang dimulai dengan huruf L
|
Economic Terms from L to N
|
Economic terms started with L
|
Kajian materi
|
Membaca modul
hal. 1.2 – 1.15
|
30
menit
|
|
|
|
2
|
menjelaskan istilah ekonomi yang dimulai dengan huruf M
|
Economic Terms from L to N
|
Economic terms started with M
|
Kajian materi
|
Membaca modul
hal. 1.17 – 1.38
|
30
menit
|
|
|
|
3
|
menjelaskan istilah ekonomi yang dimulai dengan huruf N
|
Economic Terms from L to N
|
Economic terms started with N
|
Kajian materi
|
Membaca modul
hal. 1.40 – 1.53
|
30
menit
|
|
|
|
VI
|
Menjelaskan
beberapa istilah ekonomi yang dimulai dengan huruf O dan R
|
|
|
|
|
90 menit
|
http://www.economist.com/research/economics/alphabetic.cfm?letter=O
http://www.economist.com/research/economics/alphabetic.cfm?letter=P
http://www.economist.com/research/economics/alphabetic.cfm?letter=Q
http://www.economist.com/research/economics/alphabetic.cfm?letter=R
|
VI
|
|
1
|
menjelaskan istilah ekonomi yang dimulai dengan huruf O
|
Economic Terms from O to R
|
Economic terms started with O
|
Kajian materi
|
Membaca modul
hal. 1.2 – 1.12
|
30
menit
|
|
|
|
2
|
menjelaskan istilah ekonomi yang dimulai dengan huruf P
|
Economic Terms from O to R
|
Economic terms started with P
|
Kajian materi
|
Membaca modul
hal. 1.14 – 1.34
|
30
menit
|
|
|
|
3
|
menjelaskan istilah ekonomi yang dimulai dengan huruf R
|
Economic Terms from O to R
|
Economic terms started with R
|
Kajian materi
|
Membaca modul
hal. 1.36 – 1.55
|
30
menit
|
|
VII
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Inisiasi 8
Read again the Article below and complete the table.
ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS
Some people think capitalism is wholly bad for the environment as it is based on consuming scarce resources. They want less consumption and greater reliance on renewable resources. They oppose free trade because they favour self-sufficiency (autarky), or at least so-called fair trade, and because they believe it encourages poorer countries to destroy their natural resources in order to get rich quick. Although few professional economists would share these views, in recent years many attempts have been made to incorporate environmental concerns within mainstream economics.
The traditional measure of GDP incorporates only those things that are paid for; this may include things that reduce the overall quality of life, including harming the environment. For instance, cleaning up an oil spill will increase GDP if people are paid for the clean-up. Attempts have been made to devise an alternative environmentally friendly measure of national income, but so far progress has been limited. At the very least, traditional economists increasingly agree that maximising GDP growth does not necessarily equal maximising social welfare.
Much of the damage done to the environment may be a result of externalities. An externality can arise when people engaged in economic activity do not have to take into account the full costs of what they are doing. For instance, car drivers do not have to bear the full cost of making their contribution to global warming, even though their actions may one day impose a huge financial burden on society. One way to reduce externalities is to tax them, say, through a fuel tax. Another is prohibition, say, limiting car drivers to one gallon of fuel per week. This could result in black markets, however. Allowing trade in pollution rights may encourage “efficient pollution”, with the pollution permits ending up in the hands of those for which pollution has the greatest economic upside. As this would still allow some environmental destruction, it might be unpopular with extreme greens.
There may be a case for international eco markets. For instance, people in rich countries might pay people in poor countries to stop doing activities that do environmental damage outside the poor countries, or that rich people disapprove of, such as chopping down the rain forests. Choices on environmental policy, notably on measures to reduce the threat of global warming, involve costs today with benefits delayed until the distant future. How are these choices to be made? Traditional cost-benefit analysis does not help much. In measuring costs and benefits in the far distant future, two main things seem to intervene and spoil the conventional calculations. One is uncertainty. We know nothing about what the state of the world will be in 2200. The other is how much people today are willing to pay in order to raise the welfare of others who are so remote that they can barely be imagined, yet who seem likely to be much better off materially than people today. Some economists take the view that the welfare of each future generation should be given the same weight in the analysis as the welfare of today’s. This implies that a much lower discount rate should be used than the one appropriate for short-term projects. Another option is to use a high discount rate for costs and benefits arising during the first 30 or so years, then a lower rate or rates for more distant periods. Many studies by economists and psychologists have found that people do in fact discount the distant future at lower rates than they apply to the near future.
WHAT TO DO TO REDUCE THEM
Externalities 1 .....................
2 ......................
ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS
Some people think capitalism is wholly bad for the environment as it is based on consuming scarce resources. They want less consumption and greater reliance on renewable resources. They oppose free trade because they favour self-sufficiency (autarky), or at least so-called fair trade, and because they believe it encourages poorer countries to destroy their natural resources in order to get rich quick. Although few professional economists would share these views, in recent years many attempts have been made to incorporate environmental concerns within mainstream economics.
The traditional measure of GDP incorporates only those things that are paid for; this may include things that reduce the overall quality of life, including harming the environment. For instance, cleaning up an oil spill will increase GDP if people are paid for the clean-up. Attempts have been made to devise an alternative environmentally friendly measure of national income, but so far progress has been limited. At the very least, traditional economists increasingly agree that maximising GDP growth does not necessarily equal maximising social welfare.
Much of the damage done to the environment may be a result of externalities. An externality can arise when people engaged in economic activity do not have to take into account the full costs of what they are doing. For instance, car drivers do not have to bear the full cost of making their contribution to global warming, even though their actions may one day impose a huge financial burden on society. One way to reduce externalities is to tax them, say, through a fuel tax. Another is prohibition, say, limiting car drivers to one gallon of fuel per week. This could result in black markets, however. Allowing trade in pollution rights may encourage “efficient pollution”, with the pollution permits ending up in the hands of those for which pollution has the greatest economic upside. As this would still allow some environmental destruction, it might be unpopular with extreme greens.
There may be a case for international eco markets. For instance, people in rich countries might pay people in poor countries to stop doing activities that do environmental damage outside the poor countries, or that rich people disapprove of, such as chopping down the rain forests. Choices on environmental policy, notably on measures to reduce the threat of global warming, involve costs today with benefits delayed until the distant future. How are these choices to be made? Traditional cost-benefit analysis does not help much. In measuring costs and benefits in the far distant future, two main things seem to intervene and spoil the conventional calculations. One is uncertainty. We know nothing about what the state of the world will be in 2200. The other is how much people today are willing to pay in order to raise the welfare of others who are so remote that they can barely be imagined, yet who seem likely to be much better off materially than people today. Some economists take the view that the welfare of each future generation should be given the same weight in the analysis as the welfare of today’s. This implies that a much lower discount rate should be used than the one appropriate for short-term projects. Another option is to use a high discount rate for costs and benefits arising during the first 30 or so years, then a lower rate or rates for more distant periods. Many studies by economists and psychologists have found that people do in fact discount the distant future at lower rates than they apply to the near future.
WHAT TO DO TO REDUCE THEM
Externalities 1 .....................
2 ......................
0komentar:
Posting Komentar