Войти в систему

Home
    - Создать дневник
    - Написать в дневник
       - Подробный режим

LJ.Rossia.org
    - Новости сайта
    - Общие настройки
    - Sitemap
    - Оплата
    - ljr-fif

Редактировать...
    - Настройки
    - Список друзей
    - Дневник
    - Картинки
    - Пароль
    - Вид дневника

Сообщества

Настроить S2

Помощь
    - Забыли пароль?
    - FAQ
    - Тех. поддержка



Пишет Misha Verbitsky ([info]tiphareth)
Re: Мироустройство
>Реквестирую дефиницию загадочной экономики,
>для функционирования которой нужен рост

Smith describes this tendency of the unfettered
market in terms of the now-famous metaphor of
the "invisible hand." As he puts it in The
Wealth of Nations (Bk. IV, Ch. II), when a man
conducts his business with the motive of personal
gain he is "led by an invisible hand to promote
an end which was no part of his intention." That
end, we are given to understand, is an optimal
distribution of economic goods across all levels
of society. With respect to the relationship
between landlord and laborer in particular, he
remarks that, although the owner seeks only to
gratify his own desires, he is "led by an
invisible hand to make nearly the same
distribution" of necessities among the poor as
would have resulted if all parties had been
allotted equal portions of land. Rightly or
wrongly, this rationale has been used by
economists subsequently to justify modern free-
market capitalism.

For the invisible hand to operate in this manner,
it is necessary that the producers of economic
goods function in the role of consumers as
well. In the mercantile system, Smith observes,
"the interest of the consumer is almost
constantly sacrificed to that of the producer."
Smith, on the other hand, considers it
"self-evident" that "consumption is the sole
end and purpose of all production." His most
consequential departure from mercantilism may
have been his account of growth in which
expansion of consumption is necessary for an
expanding economy.

Smith's account of economic growth begins in the
first chapter of The Wealth of Nations with a
discussion of the division of labor. When a
complex productive task can be broken down into
simple components, and each member of a work force
assigned a specific subtask, production can be
achieved more efficiently and cheaply than when
each member is directly responsible for the
finished product. Smith's own example is the
production of pins, which at that point involved a
considerable number of distinct operations. By his
estimate, a single worker would have had
difficulty making 20 pins a day, which would have
amounted to less than 200 pins for a ten person
work force. When each person specializes in a
particular operation, however, the same work force
could produce close to 48,000 pins a day (Bk. I,
Ch. I).
http://www.nd.edu/~philinst/pdfs/CHAPTER10-2009.pdf

Many theorists and policymakers in predominantly capitalist nations have emphasized capitalism's ability to promote economic growth, as measured by Gross Domestic Product (GDP), capacity utilization or standard of living. This argument was central, for example, to Adam Smith's advocacy of letting a free market control production and price, and allocate resources. Many theorists have noted that this increase in global GDP over time coincides with the emergence of the modern world capitalist system.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism#Economic_growth

>херня, а не экономика

Дык.


(Читать комментарии)

Добавить комментарий:

Как:
(комментарий будет скрыт)
(комментарий будет скрыт)
Identity URL: 
(комментарий будет скрыт)
имя пользователя:    
Вы должны предварительно войти в LiveJournal.com
 
E-mail для ответов: 
Вы сможете оставлять комментарии, даже если не введете e-mail.
Но вы не сможете получать уведомления об ответах на ваши комментарии!
Внимание: на указанный адрес будет выслано подтверждение.
(комментарий будет скрыт)
Имя пользователя:
Пароль:
Тема:
HTML нельзя использовать в теме сообщения
Сообщение:



Обратите внимание! Этот пользователь включил опцию сохранения IP-адресов пишущих комментарии к его дневнику.