Derek, you did a very good job with this milestone! The way you began your milestone with a brief explanation of what the function of the Federal Reserve Bank or Central Bank of a certain country is a helpful place to start for those who may not be acquainted with such subjects. Your effort to clearly delineate the differences between not only the Federal Reserve Bank and the Central Bank of Japan, but also the overall differences between the United States and Japan as a whole is also useful, as it provides some extra context for why the two banks may make different decision economically. Your attempt to take the information you had gathered and foresee its effects is also interesting and personally had me pause to think about how these government actions might be affecting my everyday life. Wonderful work!

Macroeconomics Milestone #3 Ruth N. Jones Dr. Jeff Bajah Regent University ECON 230: Macroeconomics 22, April 2022 Macroeconomics Milestone 3 When observing a multinational corporation, it is important to take account of the actions of the key market and home country governments’, as they can serve to be an indicator of future potential for profit or loss for the company. In the case of Samsung, with the United States as its key market (market.us, 2019), and South Korea as its home country, it is necessary for the Federal Reserve Bank and Central Bank of the United States to be examined, along with the general fiscal policy of South Korea, Samsung’s home market. Such observation can give us a clearer picture of what can be expected from Samsung in the future as far as overall gain or loss. Federal Reserve Bank Policies Firstly, the actions of the Federal Reserve Bank can have a profound effect not only on the United States as a whole, but also on other nations that do business with the United States in any way. This would include multinational corporations like Samsung, especially since the United States is Samsung’s key market (market.us, 2019). There are a few specific policies that the Federal Reserve Bank has enacted over the past three years that have served to especially effect multinational corporations such as Samsung. The Federal Reserve Bank notably expanded its holdings of Treasury securities by $80 billion over the course of a few months from June 2020 to November 2021 (The Federal Reserve Bank, 2022). Most recently, however, as of February 2022, the Federal Reserve Bank reaffirmed some monetary policy they had initially affirmed in January of 2012, which included slowing the pace of net asset purchases (The Federal Reserve Bank, 2022). Within the past three years, Federal Reserve Bank policies have been heavily influenced and even necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic and some of the ensuing Omicron variant outbreaks. These unexpected, globally reaching issues have proved difficult to navigate, but it seems as if the Federal Reserve Bank has continued to make use of the tools it has always had at its disposal, such as expanding or limiting its holding of securities. These specific actions they have taken recently (increasing or decreasing the holding of securities) have served to either increase or decrease interest rates across the United States, with earlier buying of securities serving to decrease interest rates while their more recent slowdown in buying securities has served to slowly push interest rates back up (Cowen & Tabarrock, 2021). This more recent slowdown in the Federal Reserve buying securities could prove to be a problem for Samsung, as increased interest rates may mean having to set aside more resources in order to gain fundings from various sources. This could lead to a drop in profitability, but it could also force Samsung to be more mindful of the resources they make use of, limiting their waste and overall helping to either bring increased profitability, or at least lessen the damage of decreased profitability. Central Bank Policies — Home Market Besides the Federal Reserve Bank of the United States, other nations across the world also have their own unique central banks. Although all of these central banks ultimately have the same general goal (regulating their respective country's money supply), they may go about achieving this goal in a unique way and may add on other goals depending on the specific needs of the country they serve. In the case of Samsung—whose home country is South Korea—the Bank of Korea serves as its home country’s central bank and has a separate, specific goal of price stability (Bank of Korea, 2019). In pursuit of that goal, the Bank of Korea recently decided, as of April 14, 2022, to raise the Base Rate from 1.25% to 1.50%, stating the following: “The Korean economy has continued to recover. Exports have sustained their buoyancy while facilities investment has slowed due to global supply constraints. Private consumption has recently shown modest improvement thanks to the easing of domestic COVID-19 restrictions, after having moderated. Labor market conditions have continued to improve, with the year-on-year increase in the number of persons employed remaining high. Going forward, the economy is likely to sustain its recovery albeit partly affected by the Ukraine crisis, as exports are expected to continue their solid trend of growth while private consumption is likely to improve.” (Bank of Korea, 2022) In light of not only this specific choice from the Bank of Korea, but also their reasoning behind it and the overall economic climate of South Korea at the time, it seems as if Samsung will be able to enjoy at least fairly increased or stable profitability in their home market, which, in turn, could serve to offset any potential losses in the United States from the Federal Reserve Bank’s policies. Fiscal Policy — Key Market Alongside the policies of the Federal Reserve Bank, the United States government apart from the Federal Reserve Bank has a good deal of authority to handle, make, and change certain aspects of fiscal policy. The effects of this fiscal policy have proven to be especially noticeable and effective over the past three years thanks to the government having to react quickly in light of the COVID-19 pandemic and how it affected the national and international economy. The overall fiscal policy of the United States government during the pandemic mostly seemed to involve increasing the budget for certain things, such as federal aid to state and local businesses being raised to $597 billion, and $599 billion being added to the federal deficit in order to pay for public health measures (Romer, 2021). These boosts in government spending as part of the United States’ fiscal policy would have served Samsung well as far as helping to limit the loss in profitability they may have experienced as a result of dealing with COVID-19. This overall fiscal policy of increased spending and increasing the budget would be beneficial to Samsung’s profitability in the United States post-COVID, as the extra money they would have access to could be reinvested into the company, potentially increasing their profitability. Fiscal Policies – Home Country Lastly, with so much focus being turned to the financial and governmental actions being taken by the United States as Samsung’s key market, it is also important to acknowledge the actions of the home country of Samsung—in this case, South Korea—and how its own fiscal policy over the past three years has been either a benefit or a sort of hinderance for Samsung. Within the past three years, thanks to the COVID-19 pandemic and other smaller Omnicron variant outbreaks that have lingered, the fiscal policy of the South Korean government has had to change their plans unexpectedly. Within the past year especially, South Korea has engaged in expansionary fiscal policy, with plans to continue in that through 2022 in the hope to boost the economy and assist in its recovery in a post-COVID environment (Yonhap, 2021). This expansionist fiscal policy ultimately means that the government of South Korea is hoping to expand the money supply by increasing spending (Amadeo, 2022). This allows consumers to buy more and stimulates the economy, which is integral to the economy’s recovery post-COVID (Amadeo, 2022). This expansionary policy is excellent news for Samsung, as this expanded money supply will hopefully encourage consumers to buy more of their products, easily driving up their profitability. References Modern Principles of Economics, 5th Edition (New York: Worth Publishers, 2021), Tyler Cowen and Alex Tabarrock. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. Statistics and Facts. (2019). Market.us. Retrieved April 4, 2022, from https://market.us/statistics/smartphone-brands/samsung/?msclkid=d24438b3b43c11ec8df234a63fb9e896 The Fed - Monetary Policy: Monetary Policy Report. (February, 2022). Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. https://www.federalreserve.gov/monetarypolicy/2022-02-mpr-summary.htm ‌ Yonhap. (2021, October 13). S. Korea to continue expansionary fiscal policy next year: finance minister. The Korea Herald. http://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20211013000840 Objectives of Monetary Policy | Monetary Policy | Bank of Korea. (2019). 한국은행. https://www.bok.or.kr/eng/main/contents.do?menuNo=400012 Monetary Policy Decision | Monetary Policy | Bank of Korea. (April 14, 2022). 한국은행. Retrieved April 19, 2022, from https://www.bok.or.kr/eng/bbs/E0000627/view.do?nttId=10070040&menuNo=400022&pageIndex=1 Romer, C. D. (2021, March 25). The fiscal policy response to the pandemic. Brookings. https://www.brookings.edu/bpea-articles/the-fiscal-policy-response-to-the-pandemic/ ‌ Amadeo, K. (2014, December 11). Expansionary Fiscal Policy and How It Affects You. The Balance; The Balance. https://www.thebalance.com/expansionary-fiscal-policy-purpose-examples-how-it-works-3305792‌

Timothy, I enjoyed reading your milestone, and definitely learned some interesting things while reading! Firstly, setting up the groundwork early on by stating the presence of COVID-19 as a main factor in the decisions of various central banks and governments is important, as decisions made in this specific climate would be notably different from decisions made at other times. The way you set apart space for specifically addressing the effects on profitability that would come from certain decisions that were made was a very good idea, as it naturally draws the eye and attention to what the point of the writing is. My only critique would be to bold the headings if at all possible, so as to make the delineation between sections more distinct.

Will, I learned quite a lot from reading your milestone! Firstly, your introduction did a good job of making it clear that Coca-Cola is a multinational company, and it succinctly describes what a reader needs to know about the company so they can understand the rest of the information coming after. However, when it comes to comparative advantage, what kind of comparative advantage Coca-Cola has is not made very clear in your milestone. You do mention their advantage in marketing and sheer selection options, but those do not seem to specifically be comparative advantages. Also, when it comes to Coca-Cola's key market, you mention Europe as a whole, but is there a specific country within Europe that Coca-Cola gets a sizeable amount of its revenue from? If so, it might be best to only mention that nation for the sake of relevance. Besides this, your information is succinct and clearly divided, making for easy, informative, and enjoyable reading.

Timothy, your milestone was quite interesting to read! However, there are a few things that I believe you should keep in mind when editing this before you turn it in. Firstly, there appears to be a typo or extra word of some sort within your introduction paragraph. It seems that you accidentally typed in the word “Ford” where it was unnecessary. Besides that, I was very intrigued by how you tackled Ford’s comparative advantage over the years, as that can provide some interesting insight into the company that may be missed otherwise. However, considering that a majority of this milestone project is ultimately concerned with the present condition of the company we choose to research, perhaps you could consider focusing a bit more on the present condition of Ford and where its current competitive advantage lies. Also, I would not be surprised if Ford’s home country of the United States is also its key market, but wherever Ford’s key market is was not fully made clear, at least to me. Lastly, as a simple formatting concern, your references should have a space between each source. However, beyond these concerns, this seems like a good place to start for your milestone, and with Ford’s long history in mind, there should be some interesting things to discover about it from a macroeconomic perspective!

Macroeconomics Milestone #1 Ruth N. Jones Dr. Jeff Bajah Regent University ECON 230: Macroeconomics 24, March 2022 Macroeconomics Milestone #1: Samsung Electronics Introduction When it comes to smartphone operating systems, iOS and Android are the two major competitors that come to mind. Unlike iOS, which can only really be found on Apple products, many smartphone companies make use of the Android operating system, the most notable of which is Samsung Electronics. Samsung Electronics is a South Korean company founded in 1969 by Lee Byung-Chul. Originally making a name for itself in home appliances, black-and-white TV production, and semiconductor manufacturing, Samsung quickly began expanding into wider territory. (www.samsung.com, 2021) In December of 1984, Samsung opened a manufacturing plant in the United States and invested heavily into research and development, which served to further launch the company into innovation that helped it secure a place among competitors. Samsung’s most well-known products, their cell phones, were not produced until 1988, about 19 years after the company’s founding, and the incredibly influential Galaxy series of smartphones did not make their debut until 2010. (www.samsung.com, 2021) Since then, Samsung Electronics has grown to have incredible, international reach, not only selling some of the most popular smartphones on the market, but also producing semiconductors, home appliances and vigorously seeking innovation in the tech sector that they already have so much influence in. Samsung Electronics, like many other companies with international reach, is affected—both positively and negatively—by macroeconomic factors, and many aspects of how they operate as a business can further exacerbate or ease those effects. In order to effectively examine macroeconomics in light of Samsung Electronics’ operations, it is important to cover a number of basic information concerning the company, such as its comparative advantage in certain areas, supply and demand for certain goods and services it offers, the gross domestic product of its home country and key market country, and how fluctuations in one of any number of its assets affect its profitability. Comparative Advantage Firstly, when observing a certain company or industry, it is beneficial to consider what comparative advantage (if any) a certain business or business sector has. Comparative advantage has to do with a single entity (in this case a business), being able to produce more of a certain product or service more efficiently and at less opportunity cost than another entity (or business). (Cowen & Tabarrock, 2021, p.15) With that in mind, Samsung has a comparative advantage over its competitors in the area of production, as they are a world leader in semiconductor technology and produce most of their electronic components (chips, semiconductors, software, etc.) in-house, reducing costs and increasing their ability to produce final products from those electronic components. (semiconductor.samsung.com) This shows a specialization in electronic components production, which ultimately leads to Samsung having a sizeable comparative advantage compared to other companies within their sector. Supply and Demand Secondly, supply and demand are important aspects of any business’s present and future, especially the supply and demand of whatever good or service is the most important and profitable to the business. Samsung Electronics’ key product is their line of Galaxy smartphones, as shown in Samsung’s Earnings Releases for Quarter 2 of 2021. (Samsung Electronics, 2021, p. 3-6) Samsung reported strong consumer demand even in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic in October of 2020, with a near 50% jump in smartphone sales. (news.samsung.com, 2020) However, even with this high demand, there has been disruption within Samsung’s supply chain due to the COVID-19 pandemic, causing a drop in supply. (Lee & Yang, 2021) This high demand and drop in supply could bode well for Samsung, as it could naturally lead to consumers being willing to pay more for their products. Gross Domestic Product of Home Country and Key Market In light of this supply and demand within Samsung, it is also important to consider the gross domestic product (GDP) of both the home country of Samsung, and the country that serves as their key market. Samsung Electronics is based in South Korea, which reported a GDP of $1,637,895.80 US as of the year 2020. (data.worldbank.org) As far as Samsung Electronics’ key market, it appears to be concentrated in the general region of North and South America, with emphasis on the United States of America. (Market.us) The GDP of the United States of America is reported to be $20,953,030.00 US as of the year 2020. (data.worldbank.org) A country with so much monetary value would undoubtedly be a solid place for Samsung Electronics to focus their efforts, and potentially, in turn, bolster the economy of their home county. Fluctuations and Their Effects Lastly, taking the previous information into account, fluctuations within GDP, economic growth, investments, and patents can all serve to affect a company in one way or another. Out of all of these factors, patent fluctuations could be the most pressing situation Samsung faces. Samsung was granted 6,440 patents in the year 2019 alone and is reported to have over 60,000 US patents in total. (www.uspto.gov) Any kind of fluctuation, infringement, or conflict with Samsung’s patents could prove damaging to some extent, especially since many of their patents lie in semiconductor manufacturing and other similar areas where Samsung’s comparative advantage lies. In the area of GDP, although a high number is usually considered a good thing, that high number can belie certain underlying situations such as inflation that could prove harmful to a business. Perhaps Samsung has the sheer number of patents to stave off any kind of harm should they run into issues with any patents, but they cannot be too careful in maintaining their competitive advantage through patent holdings. With that in mind, both South Korea, Samsung’s home country, and the United States, Samsung’s key market, have sizeable GDPs, with the United States Year To Date inflation being 1.86% (www.statbureau.org) and South Korea’s Year To Date inflation rate being 2.19% (Statista). Ultimately, these inflation rates are fairly stable, therefore, both nations’ GDP is not belying any kind of poor inflation. However, economic growth and investments (which are both fairly closely connected with each other, as well as inflation) References GDP (current US$) - Korea, Rep. | Data. (n.d.). Data.worldbank.org. https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD?locations=KR Modern Principles of Economics, 5th Edition (New York: Worth Publishers, 2021), Tyler Cowen and Alex Tabarrock. Samsung Electronics Begins Mass Production at New EUV Manufacturing Line. (n.d.). Samsung Semiconductor USA. Retrieved March 16, 2022, from https://semiconductor.samsung.com/us/newsroom/tech-blog/samsung-electronics-begins-mass-production-at-new-euv-manufacturing-line/#:~:text=Samsung%20Electronics%2C%20a%20world%20leader%20in%20advanced%20semiconductor Samsung. (2021). Samsung’s Heritage | About Us. Samsung Us. https://www.samsung.com/us/about-us/leadership-and-mission/heritage/ ‌ Earnings Release Q2 2021 Samsung Electronics. (2021). https://images.samsung.com/is/content/samsung/assets/global/ir/docs/2021_2Q_conference_eng.pdf ‌ Samsung Electronics Announces Third Quarter 2020 Results. (n.d.). News.samsung.com. Retrieved March 21, 2022, from https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-electronics-announces-third-quarter-2020-results?msclkid=e437ef12a93e11ecbc9e667042c55603 ‌ Lee, J., & Yang, H. (2021, October 28). Samsung warns supply chain upsets may hit chip demand, profit at 3-year high. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/business/samsung-elec-q3-profit-rises-3-year-high-chip-sales-2021-10-28/?msclkid=c1af67a1a94111ec9e7e991d966bd489 ‌ Patenting by Organizations (Utility Patents) 2019. (n.d.). Www.uspto.gov. Retrieved March 22, 2022, from https://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/ac/ido/oeip/taf/topo_19.htm#PartA1_1 ‌ Inflation Rate around the World. (n.d.). Www.statbureau.org. Retrieved March 23, 2022, from https://www.statbureau.org/?msclkid=f0ecf81caacb11ec872fad237d5e3ea4 ‌ South Korea: Inflation rate 1984-2024. (n.d.). Statista. Retrieved March 23, 2022, from https://www.statista.com/statistics/377275/inflation-rate-in-south-korea/?msclkid=13b5acecaacd11eca2de3000eb4e831e

This was a really interesting read! While I have not watched Squid Games, it did intrigue me because of its supposed social commentary on capitalism, so I appreciate how specifically you broke down the economic aspects present in the show. It is interesting to think of how even somewhat basal survival situations still involve a level of economics, which I know I tend to think of as a fairly civil kind of topic.

Genesis, although the topic of national inflation is a common one, especially when it comes to politics, it's refreshing to see it presented in a fairly neutral light that's not seeking to force a certain ideology or blame a certain action or reaction for the nation's current position in regards to inflation. Besides this, I appreciate the systematic listing of the various ways the government could handle the inflation issue, as it gives a good foundational point from where other conversations and ideas could begin. With that in mind, it would be nice to know which of the courses of action listed you think is most likely to be the most effective. Also, I have heard that inflation is a fairly natural thing for many economies, so at what point is inflation a true issue that must be addressed? Is it the same for any country? And if not, then what determines that "crisis" inflation point if you will? Thank you for your post!