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
81
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.
According to the passage, which of the following is NOT true?
选项
A、The author holds that Solow’s 1956 contribution was a substantial feat.
B、Solow thinks that progress can be made with more labour and capital.
C、The author concludes that manufacture of ideas is not a good business to go into.
D、It is impossible to challenge the two articles Mr. Solow issued.
答案
A
解析
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/ouSO777K
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
Whenyoulookup,howfarbackintimedoyousee?Oursensesare【C1】________inthepast.There’saflashoflightning,and
Whenyoulookup,howfarbackintimedoyousee?Oursensesare【C1】________inthepast.There’saflashoflightning,and
Whenyoulookup,howfarbackintimedoyousee?Oursensesare【C1】________inthepast.There’saflashoflightning,and
Whenyoulookup,howfarbackintimedoyousee?Oursensesare【C1】________inthepast.There’saflashoflightning,and
Howmuchphysicalactivityshouldteenagersdo,andhowcantheygetenough?Manyteenagersspendalotoftimebeingsedent
下面你将听到的这段讲话,主题是香港廉政公署和国际刑警组织如何共同合作打击贪污。DistinguishedGuests,LadiesandGentlemen,Firstofall,Iwishtocongratulatethe
下面你将听到联合国秘书长接受有关奖项的一段讲话。Mr.Chairman,Excellencies,LadiesandGentlemen,Ishouldlike,firstofall,toonceagainthank
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,
A、dyslexiaandintelligence.B、dyslexiaandculture.C、dyslexiaandvision.D、dyslexiaandpersonality.B本文主要分析了dyslexia(诵读困难)及其
Iremembermeetinghimoneeveningwithhispushcart.Ihadmanagedtosellallmypapersandwascominghomeinthesnow.Itwa
随机试题
一台气动薄膜调节阀,若阀杆在全行程的50%位置,则流过阀的流量也在最大量程的50%。
Drawingapictureisthesimplestwayofputtinganideadownonpaper.Thatis【C1】______menfirstbegantowritesixthousandy
小儿腹泻出现代谢性酸中毒的表现可有
腹部局限性臌隆见于下列哪种疾病
A.咳声嘶哑B.犬吠样咳嗽C.无声咳嗽D.鸡鸣样咳嗽E.金属调咳嗽百日咳的咳嗽声的特点为
具有特定情形的下列哪些证据不能作为定案的根据?(2011年卷二66题,多选)
基本完成长江中下游干流、武汉等重点防洪城市以及洞庭湖、鄱阳湖、重要支流的Ⅰ、Ⅱ级堤防的加高加固、堤身和基础防渗、填塘固基、隐患处理,并实施干流河势控制等工程建设,使长江重点()达到流域规划标准。
下列关于持续督导说法正确的有()。Ⅰ.保荐人应当自持续督导工作结束后10个工作日内向证券交易所报送保荐总结报告书Ⅱ.中小板发行新股、可转换公司债券的,持续督导的期间为股票或者可转换公司债券上市当年剩余时间及其后一个完整会计年度Ⅲ.创业板的恢复上
认知是指一个人对某一事件的认识和看法,包括对过去事件的评价,对当前事件的解释,或对未来可能发生的事件所作出的预期。所以认知是与情感、意志、动机和行为相联系的一种()。
Theprinterapologizedfor______twonamesontheprogram.
最新回复
(
0
)