Dogaru, Vasile (2005): Some observations regarding the demythification of the comparative advantage’s principle within Manoilescu generalized scheme.
Download (276kB) | Preview
The validity in time of the comparative advantage’s principle, also of its application’s denial, can generate certain misunderstandings in the good exchange’s observation for an outsider (common sense), including the expert from other economics’ areas. The resolution for these cases can be made through checking requires’ discharging of the analytical economicity’s principle. In these conditions it can be noticed if the schemes, deducted in the analytical decomposition’s basis of the standard actions, can be used in the more precise and easier measurement than through empirical calculations in order to determine the comparative advantage’s size, of the gains from trade and the productivity effect. Manoilescu generalized scheme has, from this perspective the two main characteristics: its building has started from the empirical reality’s study of the exchange phenomena and the observation has been made only inside the economics’ borders. This way the scheme sustains the unitary explanations’ approaches of some different angles of understanding the comparative advantage on basis of some analytical efforts of other researchers. The suggested scheme separates the strictly economic analysis from the one inside the politic area (commercial politics), also of the productivity effect from more exact connections, decompounding the measurement in two steps. The identification through dialectical judgements, made as a continuation of the analytical ones, of the concordance between the built analytical reality and the empirical one, assures the check of the analytical economy’s principle. This step contributes to the permanent validity’s grounding of the comparative advantage’s principle in the exchange connections within the competitive economies. Meanwhile, the demythification of its full and permanent usage is also supported, in the way of its maximum potential’s capitalization in the manufactured and exchanged goods’ choice. The comparative advantage’s principle is nothing but an application of the minimum effort’s principle – the last one having a wider area of action – and will probably remain in the economies based on the social, competitive, monetary or natural relations.
|Item Type:||MPRA Paper|
|Original Title:||Some observations regarding the demythification of the comparative advantage’s principle within Manoilescu generalized scheme|
|Keywords:||comparative advantage; Manoilescu generalized scheme; measurement; analytical economy principle; minimum effort; total factor productivity; epistemology|
|Subjects:||O - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth > O4 - Economic Growth and Aggregate Productivity > O47 - Empirical Studies of Economic Growth ; Aggregate Productivity ; Cross-Country Output Convergence
C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C7 - Game Theory and Bargaining Theory > C78 - Bargaining Theory ; Matching Theory
D - Microeconomics > D6 - Welfare Economics > D63 - Equity, Justice, Inequality, and Other Normative Criteria and Measurement
F - International Economics > F1 - Trade > F13 - Trade Policy ; International Trade Organizations
D - Microeconomics > D6 - Welfare Economics > D61 - Allocative Efficiency ; Cost-Benefit Analysis
A - General Economics and Teaching > A1 - General Economics > A11 - Role of Economics ; Role of Economists ; Market for Economists
|Depositing User:||Vasile DOGARU|
|Date Deposited:||02. Mar 2008 18:33|
|Last Modified:||13. Feb 2013 08:38|
Addison, John T and others. 1992. Macmillan Dictionary of Economics, Bucharest, Codecs Publishing House, 1999. Baumol, W.J. 2000. What Marshall didn't know: On the twentieth century's contributions to economics (I) Quarterly Journal of Economics, February 2000, vol. 115, pages: 1-44. Buchanan, James, James, Tullock, M. Gordon (1975). Liberty’s limits. Between Anarchy and Leviathan, Iasi, European Institute, 1997. Coase, R.H. 1937. The Nature of the Firm, Economica, pages: 386-405. Cobb, Charles W, Douglas, Paul H. 1928. A Theory of Production. The American Economic Review, pages: 139-165. Cosmovici, Andrei, Iacob, L and others, 1999, Educational psichology, Iaşi: Polirom, chapter XI, pages: 199-212. Deardorf, Alan. 2005. How Robust is Comparative Advantage, Paper prepared for a session of the 2005 AEA meetings, “On the 75 th Anniversary of the Opportunity Cost Formulation of Comparative Advantage,” January 7, 2005 (site of author). Dogaru, Vasile. 2000. The theoretical scheme of the international trade. The generalizing of Mihail Manoilescu’s formula, Romanian Statistic Magazine, July 2000, pages: 48-65. Dogaru, Vasile. 2003a. Population’s incomes and agro-food goods’ prices, Bucharest: Expert Publishing House. Dogaru, Vasile. 2003b. The comparative advantages in the internal exchanges and production’s possibilities border, Romanian Statistic Magazine, no 4, 2003, pages: 66-83. Dogaru, Vasile. 2004. The decreasing efficiencies’ law and the partial productivity, in the volume Proceedings of the 1st International Scientific Conference „Economy and Globalisation” vol I, pages: 189-199, Târgu Jiu: Brâncuşi Academical Publishing House. Dogaru, Vasile. 2005a. The comparative advantage in generalised scheme of Manoilescu, in Romanian Journal for Economic Forecasting, no 3/ 2005. Dogaru, Vasile. 2005b. The general validity of comparative advantage in trade exchanges, Romanian Economic Review, Romanian Academy, tome 49-50, 171-198, 2005. Dogaru, Vasile. 2006. Manoilescu generalized scheme regarding the international goods exchange – a general presentation, Probleme economice (Economic Issues), no. 226-227, The National Economic Research Institute, Romanian Academy, forthcoming 2006. Epping, Randy Charles. 2001. Guide for the beginner in the global economy, Bucharest, Arc Publishing House, 2002. Florian, Mircea. 1983. Recesivity as a global structure, Bucharest, Eminescu Publishing House, tome I. Georgescu-Roegen, Nicholas. 1971. Entropy Law and the economic process, Bucharest, Political Publishing House, 1979. Georgescu-Roegen, Nicholas. 1979. La décroissance, Editons Sang de la terre, Paris Kant, Immanuel. 1781. Pure reason criticism, Bucharest: Schools’ House Publishing House, 1930. Manoilescu, Mihail. 1937. National productive forces and external trade, Bucharest: Scientifical and Encyclopaedic Publishing House, 1986. Mises, Ludwig von. 1949. Human Action, San Francisco: Fox and Wilkes, 1996. Palgrave, The New. A Dicţionnary of Economics (PAL), tomes I-IV. 1987. London: The Macmillan Press Limited, 1998. Schumpeter Joseph A. 1954. History of Economic Analysis, Routledge, Londra, 1994. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). 2002. Power Parity and Real Expenditures, Paris. Ricardo, David. 1817. Special works, Bucharest, Academy’s Publishing House R.S.R., 1959. Viner, Jacob. 1937. Studies in the Theory of International Trade, Harper and Brothers Publishers. New York, 1937.