Problem 3: Big “What-If?”: American ImmigrationThe U.S. population in 1800 had 2.5 million workers. In 1900 it had 40 million. A. If this had not been the case because there had been no net...

Problem 3: Big “What-If?”: American ImmigrationThe U.S. population in 1800 had 2.5 million workers. In 1900 it had 40 million. A. If this had not been the case because there had been no net immigration into the United Statesafter 1800, and if the worker population had grown by natural increase at 2.18%/year, whatwould the U.S. labor force have been in 1900? B. The extra U.S. workers as of 1900 coming from immigration over the previous century—migrants, and children of migrants, and children of children of migrants, were deployed about1/6 to agriculture, 1/3 to services, and 1/2 to manufacturing. Given that the actual labor force in1900 was 1/3 deployed to each sector, what would the deployment of the U.S. labor force havelooked like in 1900 without immigrants if the deployment of the descendants of the 1800population did not shift in the absence of immigration? C. The descendants of the 1800 population would not all have remained in their actualoccupations in the absence of immigrants—there would have been considerable adjustment. Butsuppose that they had. In the history we know, America produced 25% and Britain produced20% of world manufactured goods in 1900.Suppose that in our non-immigrant “what-if?” American manufacturing production had shrunk inproportion to the shrinkage in manufacturing workers.Suppose that 2/3 of that shrunk manufacturing production had been located instead in Britain(with the rest going to other European countries).What then would the shares of America and Britain in global manufacturing have been in that“what-if?” Problem 4: Big “What-If?”: The Great DepressionU.S. nominal GDP was $100 billion in 1929. The multiplier ? was 3. By 1933 an extra 25% ofthe non-farm labor force were unemployed relative to normal times, with the non-farm laborforce being two-thirds of total employment. A. How much higher was the total unemployment rate in 1933 than in 1929—that is, includingfarmers? B. Remember Okun’s Law: when the unemployment rate goes up by 1%-point, production fallsrelative to the economy’s potential by 2%. Assume that production was equal to potential in1929. By how much, then, was production below potential in 1933? C. Suppose that Herbert Hoover had wanted to stop the Great Depression in its tracks and restorefull-employment by embarking on a large-scale government spending program. About how muchwould he have had to spend? D. Actual federal government spending in 1929 was $4 billion. What would Hoover have had todo to the size of the federal government in order to accomplish such a program? E. Total—federal plus state and local—government spending in 1929 was $11 billion. Whatwould Hoover have had to do to the size of the total government in order to accomplish such aprogram? I provided some formula that learned from class which may or maynot relates to problem: Or rule of 72