le TD sur la parité de pouvoir d'achat et une révision de première sur euros constants-euros courants



Introduction : Rappel de première

Visionner le diaporama : http://www.ac-versailles.fr/PEDAGOGI/SES/production/anivalvol.html

A partir du diaporama , faites l’exercice n° 1

Exercice n°1 : Croissance en valeur , croissance en volume

Evolution du PIB en France entre 1995 et 2003






PIB en milliards d’euros courants






Indice du PIB courant , base 100 en 1995

Indice des prix , base 100 en 1995






PIB en milliards d’euros constants 1995

Indice du PIB constants base 100 1995

Questions :

  1. Complétez le tableau après avoir rappelé la formule vue en première permettant de passer du PIB en euros courants au PIB en euros constants
  2. Comparez l’indice du PIB en euros courants et en euros constants , base 100 en 95 . Que pouvez-vous en conclure ?

Exercice d’application à la maison :

Consommation finale des ménages






Consommation finale des ménages en valeur en milliards d’euros






Indice de la consommation finale en valeur , base 100 en 1995

Indice des prix à la consommation , base 100 1995






Consommation finale des ménages en volume ( en euros constants 1995 )

Indice de la consommation finale en euros constants , base 100 1995

Questions :

  1. Complétez le tableau

Exercice de complément : aller sur le site : http://dornbusch.free.fr/#terminale et cliquer sur exercices d’applications dans la rubrique euros courants / euros constants

Exercice n°2 : la notion de parité de pouvoir d’achat : cf présentation power point en TD.

Exercice d’application :

Document 1 : un exemple de compréhension : le mcdo

When our economics editor invented the Big Mac index in 1986 as a light-hearted introduction to exchange-rate theory, little did she think that 20 years later she would still be munching her way, a little less sylph-like, around the world. As burgernomics enters its third decade, the Big Mac index is widely used and abused around the globe. It is time to take stock of what burgers do and do not tell you about exchange rates.

The Economist's Big Mac index is based on one of the oldest concepts in international economics: the theory of purchasing-power parity (PPP), which argues that in the long run, exchange rates should move towards levels that would equalise the prices of an identical basket of goods and services in any two countries. Our “basket” is a McDonald's Big Mac, produced in around 120 countries. The Big Mac PPP is the exchange rate that would leave burgers costing the same in America as elsewhere. Thus a Big Mac in China costs 10.5 yuan, against an average price in four American cities of $3.10 (see the first column of the table). To make the two prices equal would require an exchange rate of 3.39 yuan to the dollar, compared with a market rate of 8.03. In other words, the yuan is 58% “undervalued” against the dollar. To put it another way, converted into dollars at market rates the Chinese burger is the cheapest in the table.

In contrast, using the same method, the euro and sterling are overvalued against the dollar, by 22% and 18% respectively; the Swiss and Swedish currencies are even more overvalued. On the other hand, despite its recent climb, the yen appears to be 28% undervalued, with a PPP of only ¥81 to the dollar. Note that all emerging-market currencies also look too cheap.

The index was never intended to be a precise predictor of currency movements, simply a take-away guide to whether currencies are at their “correct” long-run level. Curiously, however, burgernomics has an impressive record in predicting exchange rates: currencies that show up as overvalued often tend to weaken in later years. But you must always remember the Big Mac's limitations. Burgers cannot sensibly be traded across borders and prices are distorted by differences in taxes and the cost of non-tradable inputs, such as rents.

Despite our frequent health warnings, some American politicians are fond of citing the Big Mac index rather too freely when it suits their cause—most notably in their demands for a big appreciation of the Chinese currency in order to reduce America's huge trade deficit. But the cheapness of a Big Mac in China does not really prove that the yuan is being held far below its fair-market value. Purchasing-power parity is a long-run concept. It signals where exchange rates are eventually heading, but it says little about today's market-equilibrium exchange rate that would make the prices of tradable goods equal. A burger is a product of both traded and non-traded inputs.

An idea to relish : It is quite natural for average prices to be lower in poorer countries than in developed ones. Although the prices of tradable things should be similar, non-tradable services will be cheaper because of lower wages. PPPs are therefore a more reliable way to convert GDP per head into dollars than market exchange rates, because cheaper prices mean that money goes further. This is also why every poor country has an implied PPP exchange rate that is higher than today's market rate, making them all appear undervalued. Both theory and practice show that as countries get richer and their productivity rises, their real exchange rates appreciate. But this does not mean that a currency needs to rise massively today. Jonathan Anderson, chief economist at UBS in Hong Kong, reckons that the yuan is now only 10-15% below its fair-market value.

Source : LE MACDO comme référence de la PPA McCurrencies , May 25th 2006
From The Economist print edition

Questions :

  1. Donnez le mode de lecture et de calcul des chiffres entourés
  2. Expliquez , à partir du texte , pourquoi le Big Mac est un bon indicateur pour comparer les monnaies
  3. Trouvez dans le tableau le pays dont la monnaie paraît si l’on retient l’indicateur big mac
    • la plus surévaluée par rapport à son niveau de PPA
    • la moins surévaluée par rapport à son niveau de PPA
  4. La chine, comme le pensent de nombreux politiciens américains, a-t-elle une monnaie sous-évaluée ?
  5. Que pouvez vous en conclure sur l’utilisation des PPA,

Document :

Big Mac prices build in the differences in local production costs between countries. For example, the price of beef is lower in Australia than in Japan, and Australian Big Mac prices reflect the lower input cost. Perhaps a standardized commodity that is free of variations in local costs would provide more accurate PPP exchange rate estimates.
Consider individual song downloads on iTunes. Like Big Macs, their pricing is set by a single firm--in this case, Apple. Unlike Big Macs, we can expect that there are no local variations in costs. Apple negotiates with the same music company (Sony, BMG, etc.) for the rights to digital provision of a given song. Hence, any cross-country differences in download prices likely arise from differences in demand.

There are two things interesting to note here. First, apart from Canada, iTunes songs are priced at a premium over the United States in all other music stores. Second, there doesn't appear to be a positive relationship between the PPP exchange rates implied by the iTunes and Big Mac indexes.
In theory, if Apple based its iTunes pricing optimally on long-term forecasts of exchange rates, then the iTunes Index should out-predict the Big Mac Index for exchange rate movements, as it is free of local variation. Only time will tell on that.
1. Apple appears to be practicing international price discrimination in its iTunes pricing.
Usually, the richer the country, the higher the price.

Source : An iTunes Index for Exchange Rates

0 commentaires: