首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
Fifty years ago, Robert Solow published the first of two papers on economic growth that eventually won him a Nobel prize. Celebr
Fifty years ago, Robert Solow published the first of two papers on economic growth that eventually won him a Nobel prize. Celebr
admin
2017-03-15
94
问题
Fifty years ago, Robert Solow published the first of two papers on economic growth that eventually won him a Nobel prize. Celebrated and seasoned, he was thus a natural choice to serve on an independent "commission on growth" announced last month by the World Bank. (The commission will weigh and sift what is known about growth, and what might be done to boost it.)
Natural, that is, except for anyone who takes his 1956 contribution literally. For, according to the model he laid out in that article, the efforts of policymakers to raise the rate of growth per head are ultimately futile.
A government eager to force the pace of economic advance may be tempted by savings drives, tax cuts, investment subsidies or even population controls. As a result of these measures, each member of the labour force may enjoy more capital to work with. But this process of "capital deepening", as economists call it, eventually runs into diminishing returns. Giving a worker a second computer does not double his output.
Accumulation alone cannot yield lasting progress, Mr. Solow showed. What can? Anything that allows the economy to add to its output without necessarily adding more labour and capital. Mr. Solow labeled this font of wealth "technological progress" in 1956, and measured its importance in 1957. But in neither paper did he explain where it came from or how it could be accelerated. Invention, innovation and ingenuity were all "exogenous" influences, lying outside the remit of his theory. To practical men of action, Mr. Solow’s model was thus an impossible tease: what it illuminated did not ultimately matter; and what really mattered, it did little to illuminate.
The law of diminishing returns holds great sway over the economic imagination. But its writ has not gone unchallenged. A fascinating new book, Knowledge and the Wealth of Nations by David Warsh, tells the story of the rebel economics of increasing returns. A veteran observer of dismal scientists at work, first at the Boston Globe and now in an online column called Economic Principals, Mr. Warsh has written the best book of its kind since Peter Bernstein’s Capital Ideas.
Diminishing returns ensure that firms cannot grow too big, preserving competition between them. This, in turn, allows the invisible hand of the market to perform its magic. But, as Mr. Warsh makes clear, the fealty economists show to this principle is as much mathematical as philosophical. The topology of diminishing returns is easy for economists to navigate: a landscape of declining gradients and single peaks, free of the treacherous craters and crevasses that might otherwise entrap them.
The hero of the second half of Mr. Warsh’s book is Paul Romer, of Stanford University, who took up the challenge ducked by Mr. Solow. If technological progress dictates economic growth, what kind of economics governs technological advance? In a series of papers, culminating in an article in the Journal of Political Economy in 1990, Mr. Romer tried to make technology "endogenous", to explain it within the terms of his model. In doing so, he steered growth theory out of the comfortable cul-de-sac in which Mr. Solow had so neatly parked it.
The escape required a three-point turn. First, Mr. Romer assumed that ideas were goods—of a particular kind. Ideas, unlike things, are "non-rival": Everyone can make use of a single design, recipe or blueprint at the same time. This turn in the argument led to a second: the fabrication of ideas enjoys increasing returns to scale. Expensive to produce, they are cheap, almost costless, to reproduce. Thus the total cost of a design does not change much, whether it is used by one person or by a million.
Blessed with increasing returns, the manufacture of ideas might seem like a good business to go into. Actually, the opposite is true. If the business is free to enter, it is not worth doing so, because competition pares the price of a design down to the negligible cost of reproducing it.
Unless idea factories can enjoy some measure of monopoly over their designs—by patenting them, copyrighting them, or just keeping them secret—they will not be able to cover the fixed cost of inventing them. That was the final turn in Mr. Romer’s new theory of growth.
How much guidance do these theories offer to policymakers, such as those sitting on the World Bank’s commission? In Mr. Solow’s model, according to a common caricature, technology falls like "manna from heaven", leaving the bank’s commissioners with little to do but pray. Mr. Romer’s theory, by contrast, calls for a more worldly response: educate people, subsidies their research, import ideas from abroad, carefully gauge the protection offered to intellectual property.
But did policymakers need Mr. Romer’s model to reveal the importance of such things? Mr. Solow has expressed doubts. Despite the caricature, he did not intend in his 1956 model to deny that innovation is often dearly bought and profit-driven. The question is whether anything useful can be said about that process at the level of the economy as a whole. That question has yet to be answered definitively. In particular, Mr. Solow worries that some of the "more powerful conclusions" of the new growth theory are unearned, flowing as they do from powerful assumptions.
At one point in Mr. Warsh’s book, Mr. Romer is quoted comparing the building of economic models to writing poetry. It is a triumph of form as much as content. This creative economist did not discover anything new about the world with his 1990 paper on growth. Rather, he extended the metre and rhyme-scheme of economics to capture a world—the knowledge economy—expressed until then only in the loosest kind of doggerel. That is how economics makes progress. Sadly, it does not, in and of itself, help economies make progress.
The sentence "Giving a worker a second computer does not double his output." (Para. 3) can be best interpreted as______.
选项
A、the measures adopted by the government are not effective at all
B、having more capital to work with is not necessarily effective
C、workers needs more than computers to achieve productivity
D、capital deepening leads to efficiency
答案
B
解析
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/EuSO777K
本试题收录于:
NAETI高级口译笔试题库外语翻译证书(NAETI)分类
0
NAETI高级口译笔试
外语翻译证书(NAETI)
相关试题推荐
Everyautumn,retailershirelargenumbersofseasonalworkerstohandletherushofholidaybusiness.Then,afterthenewyear
Aboutsixmonthsafterthey’dreturned,whiletheywerewalkingslowlyinthestreetinahotafternoon,thechildwasdreaming
下面你将听到一段关于中国教育状况的介绍。中国人历来重视教育,实施“独生子女”政策后尤为如此。中国家庭的平均教育支出约占其收入的15%,而据中国社会调查所的一项研究成果显示,有43%的家庭都设立了专门账户,用来支付孩子的教育费用。近年来,
1986年全国人大常委会副委员长班禅喇嘛在西康地区大法会上教诲信徒们,要爱惜民族团结,维护祖国统一。在中国,公民的信仰自由受到法律保护。目前全西藏在寺僧尼约有14,000多人,另有800位宗教界人士在各级人大、政协、佛教协会和政府部门中工作。
WhichofthefollowingisNOTthepurposeofAmerica’scentralbank?
A、Weshouldbuildmoreschoolstoensureoursuccess.B、Educationistheverycauseweshouldcontinuedevotingourselvesto.C、
Collegerankingsaredead!Longlivecollegerankings!Atameetingofthecountry’sleadingliberalartsschoolsthisweekinA
"It’stoughtomakepredictions,especiallyaboutthefuture,"saidthatgreatbaseball-playingphilosopher,YogiBerra.Andyet
A、Tohearinspiringspeeches.B、Toelectanewpartyleader.C、Toappraisetheparty’sperformance.D、Todiscusspolicy.B
A、Theoldershegotthemorecomfortableshewaswithherself.B、Asshegotoldershenolongerransacredanymore.C、Now,alot
随机试题
胃肠道手术留置胃管时,拔胃管的指征是()。
下列测定路面平整度的方法中属于断面类的方法有()。
钢材的疲劳破坏可以用疲劳极限来表示,疲劳极限是指疲劳试验中试件在()作用下,在规定的周期基数内不发生断裂所能承受的最大应力。
根据债券定价原理,如果一种附息债券的市场价格等于其面值,则其到期收益率()其票面利率。
若某设备投资项目的期望投资收益率为16%,标准离差为0.08,则该设备投资项目标准离差率为()。
一个年轻的美国下级外交官在访问中国时,问了一个令他自己尴尬的问题:东方人怎么会如此令人费解。中国官员笑了笑,然后,温和地回答他:就西方人的缺乏观察力而言,他们的民族才是令人费解的。以下哪一个选项最好地反映了中国官员解释的要点( )
4,3,8,6,12,12,( )
根据商标法规定,下列属于商标侵权行为的有()。
Earlyanthropologists,followingthetheorythatwordsdeterminethought,believedthatlanguageanditsstructurewereentirel
Policiescateringtoalowtuitionintopuniversitiesmayturnouttobringnegativeeffect,JohnBlackburnregardsthenewfi
最新回复
(
0
)