A question about economics, a question about economics

Instead of destruction, but productive labor, value creation, there will be gross domestic product. But the effect is different. The care of the mother and the nanny does not feel the same level of happiness for the child, so it will feel unhappy.

And the plane incident can be explained similarly. Let's put it this way, I have a cold, I go to the doctor, and I also create GDP, because I consume medicine, if it is going to be produced...

Therefore, economics is rational, although it is somewhat impersonal, but it is about the minimum price in exchange for the maximum value.

That's the extreme case, and the economy is at a standstill. But now, such a big swing is enough to overturn a boat, of course, not needed.

Moreover, there are contradictions in economic theory itself.

The premise of the "rational man" assumption determines that it is far from conventional happiness.

In the narrow sense of the economy, social welfare is reduced, so in fact, the economy cannot be measured only by money.

I don't understand it very well, but what I personally understand is that it is just a numerical change, and it has little practical significance.

1) "Shortage" is a common phenomenon in socialist countries. The capitalist economy is essentially demand-restricted, often "oversupplied"; The socialist economy is basically resource-limited, production growth is limited by resources, and the behavior of upper-level decision-makers, business operators, and consumers is inevitably constrained by the shortage of materials, and "demand exceeds supply."

2) The root cause of the "shortage" comes from the existence of a "father-son" relationship between the state and the enterprise. There is a driving force in socialist enterprises to constantly expand reproduction and pursue the quantity of products. The pursuit of product quantity, hoarding of raw materials, and the shortage of materials have formed a process of mutual reinforcement and self-sustainment.

Leaders at all levels are trying to win as much investment as possible for their own departments, and the overspending of enterprises can be subsidized by the state, and the investment risks are mainly borne by the state, which is also an important reason for the shortage.

3) The "shortage" affects the improvement of the quality of life of the people. The "shortage" has created a social relationship in which the "seller" dominates the "buyer", and the inhabitants not only have to bear the price of searching, queuing, and waiting for the goods, but also often have to endure the rudeness and carelessness of the seller or the distributor of goods.

4) Only the reform of the economic system will make it possible to eliminate the phenomenon of "shortage". In reform, we must first have a clear understanding of the mode of operation of the traditional socialist system and its drawbacks, and have correct theories as guidance. One of the goals of the reform is to eliminate the "shortage".

Whether the shortfall has been overcome or not, and the extent of the shortage, is one of the important indicators of the reform process. Körnay's economic theory is actually a theoretical summary of the drawbacks of the traditional socialist economic system, thus providing a theoretical basis for the reform of the economic system in socialist countries. , Reference:

The heart of the sky, assuming that it is not ****, is a shortage of stoves under the market.

Condition **Controlled under equilibrium**.

Because the ** line is fixed, the manufacturer's willingness to ** "people's willing demand, so there will be no queue, and there will be no purchase after queuing." Because resources are limited, they will not be transported from other places to sell, but can only be distributed by the state, and there will be queues in socialist areas. I don't know, I may have to ask the Chinese in the 70s, but in the capitalist areas, it should not be possible to finish the line.

Purely personal opinion.

Manufacturer control**: first-come, first-served.

Control**) Socialism: Equalization method, there will be some after the row, please refer to the meaning of scarcity and shortage in your books.

It is impossible for a shortage of late arguments in economics to arise without scarcity.

Think about why the shortage is happening.

Because the ** is set too low below equilibrium price, the situation of short supply occurs.

For example, Mak Kee only sells 5 mosquitoes for a meal, and even if you buy it first in an hour, many people will go to it.

On the other hand, what will be the point in the case of rarity?

In the case of scarcity, you don't want more money, you don't want to have more, you don't want to shortage!?,

The first null: the demand decreases.

The second short: demand increases by 6%.

1 Keynesian Investment Multiplier Theory.

The propensity to consume proposed by Caiths = the amount of consumption and the amount of income, which is the average propensity to consume. Its marginal propensity to consume = consumption increment Income increment = c y, which varies according to the law of getting smaller and smaller.

Keynes's investment multiplier theory is that under a certain marginal propensity to consume, a certain amount of new investment can lead to an increase in income and employment several times over a certain period of time, or lead to several times the amount of GDP invested. This theory can be summarized by the following formula:

gdp=△i·k (1)

k=1 (1- c y)=1 (1-consumption increment income increment) (2) where i is the new investment and k is the investment multiplier.

Keynes's investment multiplier theory is a macro investment theory based on the marginal consumption propensity on the basis of total social income and total consumption, and it does not specifically analyze the investment-pull problem in the regional economy and industrial economy.

The second question is to learn and sell ...... now

k=1／(1-△c／△y)=1/（

gdp=△i·k (1)=800

I don't know if I've never been exposed to this concept before......

No, cost refers to the highest value of the option to be abandoned.

In addition to the money, effort, and time spent raising children, there are other values that can be obtained, for example: you were originally a chemistry student, you gave up your income for the sake of your children, gave up 22 years of academic research, gave up money, or directly said that because you got married & had children, you can't be 3 hearts and 2 minds in love, the reason why high-income people have fewer children is because having children will inevitably reduce your working hours, and directly reduce your income.

The interest on the borrowed is always higher than the interest on the deposit, otherwise what will the bank eat?