contrast your example. What makes the examples different? How do those differences relate to the different roles that an economist plays as a scientist and policy advisor? my example: An example of a positive statement is "the United States GPD growth was 2.3% during the forst quarter in the year of 2017". A normative example of this statement is "The policies that the government should implement would be able to help increase the GPD growth "An idea of a normative argument can be: " The government should take more steps to fight the issue". A value judgement could be " The job rate in the United States is at 60.1%" A current story could contain positive and normative statements.As we can read in the examples, they are normative but they are also different because of the economic policy statements. The differences on the examples highlights the different roles an economist have such as policy advisor, because it's using normative statements to recommend accurate policies, and as scientists, because it is using positive statements to describe economic trends.

The macroeconomic terms, positive and normative analysis or economics, refer to the nature of two different branches or schools of thought. Positive analysis is represented by fact- based statements that can be tested and proven by measurable data. There is no personal judgement or opinions linked to positive analysis as it is simply factual and objective in its approach. Negative analysis encompasses a more value-based ideology that takes into consideration the most socially favorable or emotionally conscious economic option. A recent decision made by President Biden to remove $10,000 of college debt from individuals whom make an income less than $125,000 a year would perhaps be considered a normative analysis on the matter of student debt. While the financial, social, and economic favorability and fairness may be debated, I personally feel that it was a conscious attempt to relieve some financial burden from a large portion of our population