Spelling suggestions: "subject:"ligou, arthur cecil"" "subject:"ligou, arthur decil""
1 |
A criticism of Pigou's welfare economicsBiswas, Ajit Kumar January 1952 (has links)
Thesis (M.A.)--Boston University / In Chapter I, the object of the study is outlined, followed by a discussion of Pre-Pigovian welfare economics. The purpose of our study consists in a critical analysis of Professor Pigou1s welfare concept and propositions in the light of ideas held by his predecessors and successors. Pre-Pigovian welfare economics is dealt with under three different groups among which a logical classification is possible, These groups are English classical economists (A. Smith, B. Say, D. Ricardo, and others), continental classical economists (V. Pareto, L. Walras, E. Barone) and neo-claseical economists (H. Sidgwick, A. Marshall, and others), It is shown that the English classical economists regarded free competition as a means to the widening of the economy rather than to a rational allocation of resources, The continental economists, Pareto and Barone formulated the concept of subjective optimum and dealt with the problem of allocation in the static sense. The neo-classical economists made a compromise. While accepting the doctrine of marginal utility, they were not preoccupied with the static problem of allocation. In the manner of the English classicists, they discussed the forces which govern the supply of ultimate factors of production and human wants. A typical feature of neo-classical economics is Marshall's partial surplus analysis.
|
2 |
Método, equilíbrio, expectativas e desemprego: o debate entre keynesianos e neoclássicosAndrada, Alexandre Flávio Silva 20 May 2008 (has links)
Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:48:51Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
Alexandre Flavio Silva Andrada.pdf: 670430 bytes, checksum: d317a9a7393cab2f5438d96670a8d051 (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2008-05-20 / The present work aims to provide a critique to the Walrasian approach in Macroeconomics. The debate between Keynesians (Keynes, New Keynesians and Post-Keynesians) and Neoclassical (Monetarists and New Classical) about method, expectations, and equilibrium is presented. Trying so to refuse Lucas s critique, which says that Keynes did not respect economic analyze straightjacket , i.e., selfish agents and clear markets. About unemployment a critical revision of General Theory s second chapter is made as well the concepts of natural rate and involuntary unemployment. The conclusions are: do not seem that Friedman s instrumentalist approach is the correct referential to Macroeconomics, rational expectations hypothesis do not explain men effective behavior, continuous market clear is tautological, and involuntary unemployment referred to a foreign economic agent individual characteristics situation. It is a Macroeconomic unemployment. At last while Microeconomics can avoid historicists considerations, Macroeconomics can not. Macroeconomics issues are related to historical moment, stage of institutions development and to a more human economic agent behavior / O presente trabalho visa apresentar uma crítica à abordagem walrasiana na Macroeconomia. Apresenta-se o debate entre Keynesianos (Keynes, Novos Keynesianos e Pós Keynesianos) e Neoclássicos (Monetaristas e Novos Clássicos) sobre o método, as expectativas e o equilíbrio na análise econômica. Tenta-se, assim, refutar a crítica de Lucas segundo a qual Keynes não teria respeitado a camisa-de-força da economia, isto é, agentes egoístas e equilíbrio nos mercados. A respeito do desemprego, faz-se uma revisão crítica do segundo capítulo da Teoria Geral, bem como dos conceitos de taxa natural de desemprego e desemprego involuntário. As conclusões obtidas são as seguintes: não parece ser correta a abordagem instrumentalista de Friedman como referência para a Macroeconomia, a hipótese de expectativas racionais pouco diz sobre o comportamento real dos homens, o equilíbrio contínuo dos mercados é tautológico e o desemprego involuntário diz respeito a uma situação alheia às características individuais do agente econômico. É um desemprego macroeconômico. Por fim, enquanto a microeconomia pode abster-se de considerações historicistas, a Macroeconomia não o pode. As questões Macroeconômicas estão ligadas ao momento histórico, ao grau de desenvolvimento das instituições e ao comportamento mais humano do homem econômico
|
Page generated in 0.0265 seconds