identify the concrete background conditions and assumptions on how the world works

For this second assignment, I am asking you to briefly:
1.    provide an example of a falsifiable statement or theory in economics and discuss why this specific statement is scientific according to Popper by identifying its potential falsifiers and explaining the importance of these. (Hint: at minimum, a falsifiable statement must be law-like)
2.    identify the concrete background conditions and assumptions on how the world works that are implicitly taken for granted when testing the statement or theory provided in 1 and explain how they can be invoked to immunize it when a falsifying instance is found. Recall that statements can be immunized by ad hoc re-classifications of mentioned terms, ad hoc changes to underlying theories and/or making ad-hoc changes to the domain the theory is supposed to apply to and show how each type of immunizing strategy could apply to your chosen example.
3.    evaluate which of the possible immunizing strategies you identified can potentially improve the development of the theory (and would thus be deemed progressive theory adjustments by Lakatos) and how; and which are more likely to harm it (and thus add to theory degeneration) and how.
Your assignment should contain no more than 500 words (excluding things like your name, student number, the name of the course and references). Please specify the amount of words you have used below your text. Exceeding the word limit by 10% or less will not be penalized. If your word count is between 550 and 600, one full point will be subtracted. If you write more than 600 words, the assignment will not be graded.