[영문독후감] 폴 크루그먼의 The Accidental Theorist
페이지 정보
작성일 23-01-27 07:00
본문
Download : [영문독후감] 폴 크루그먼의 The.hwp
![[영문독후감] 폴 크루그먼의 The-7378_01.jpg](https://sales.happyreport.co.kr/prev/201206/%5B%EC%98%81%EB%AC%B8%EB%8F%85%ED%9B%84%EA%B0%90%5D%20%ED%8F%B4%20%ED%81%AC%EB%A3%A8%EA%B7%B8%EB%A8%BC%EC%9D%98%20The-7378_01.jpg)
![[영문독후감] 폴 크루그먼의 The-7378_02_.jpg](https://sales.happyreport.co.kr/prev/201206/%5B%EC%98%81%EB%AC%B8%EB%8F%85%ED%9B%84%EA%B0%90%5D%20%ED%8F%B4%20%ED%81%AC%EB%A3%A8%EA%B7%B8%EB%A8%BC%EC%9D%98%20The-7378_02_.jpg)
![[영문독후감] 폴 크루그먼의 The-7378_03_.jpg](https://sales.happyreport.co.kr/prev/201206/%5B%EC%98%81%EB%AC%B8%EB%8F%85%ED%9B%84%EA%B0%90%5D%20%ED%8F%B4%20%ED%81%AC%EB%A3%A8%EA%B7%B8%EB%A8%BC%EC%9D%98%20The-7378_03_.jpg)
![[영문독후감] 폴 크루그먼의 The-7378_04_.jpg](https://sales.happyreport.co.kr/prev/201206/%5B%EC%98%81%EB%AC%B8%EB%8F%85%ED%9B%84%EA%B0%90%5D%20%ED%8F%B4%20%ED%81%AC%EB%A3%A8%EA%B7%B8%EB%A8%BC%EC%9D%98%20The-7378_04_.jpg)

So lets continue. Suppose that our economy initially employs 120 million workers, which corresponds more or less to full employment. It takes two person-days to produce either a hot dog or a bun. (Hey, realism is not the point here.) Assuming that the economy produces what consumers want, it must be producing 30 million hot dogs and 30 million buns each day; 60 million workers will be employed in each sector.
순서
Now, suppose that improved technology allows a worker to produce a hot dog in one day rather than two. And suppose that the economy makes use of this increased productivity to increase consumption to 40 million hot dogs with buns a day. This requires some reallocation of labor, with only 40 million workers now producing hot dogs, 80 million producing buns.
Imagine an economy that produces only two things: hot dogs and buns. Consumers in this economy insist that every hot dog come with a bun, and vice versa. And labor is the only input to production. OK, timeout. Before we go any further, I need to ask what you think of an essay that begins this way. Does it sound silly to you? Were you about to turn the virtual page, figuring that this couldnt be about anything important?
It so happens that I am about to use my hot-dog-and-bun example to talk about technology, jobs, and the future of capitalism. Readers who feel that big subjects can only be properly addressed in big books--which present big ideas, using big words--will find my intellectual style offensive. Such people imagine that when they write or quote such books, they are being profound. But more often than not, theyre being profoundly foolish. And the best way to avoid such foolishness is to play around with a thought experiment or two.
Imagine an economy that produces only two things: hot dogs and buns. Consumers in this economy insist that every hot dog come with a bun, and vice versa. And labor is the only input to production.
One of the points of this column is to illustrate a paradox: You cant do serious economics unless you are willing to be playful. Economic theory is not a collection of dictums laid down by pompous authority figures. Mainly, it is a menagerie of thought experiments--parables, if you like--that are intended to capture the logic of economic processes in a simplified way. In the end, of course, ideas must be tested against the facts. But even to know what facts are relevant, you must play with those ideas in hypothetical settings. And I use the word play advisedly: Innovative thinkers, in economics and other disciplines, often have a pronounced whimsical streak.
설명
영문독후감,폴 크루그먼,The Accidental Theorist
Download : [영문독후감] 폴 크루그먼의 The.hwp( 43 )
OK, timeout. Before we go any further, I need to ask what you think of an essay that begins this way. Does it sound silly to you? Were you about to turn the virtual page, figuring that this couldnt be about anything important?
레포트 > 인문,어학계열
[영문독후감] 폴 크루그먼의 The Accidental Theorist
다.