|Главная » Статьи » Law-Preservation-labour / "Все богатство из Труда"(Библия) по Закону Сохранения Труда|
The Law of the preservation of labor about transaction expenses of Kouz: The memory of the founders of the economics of XXI century.
World economic public very sharply else times realized in 2013 yr., as is valued the today intellectual labor of Highly professional the scientists of economists who, even abandoning from us, as Ronald Kouz in 103 year, cause deep and sincere regret which humanity is deprived practically unique on earth Highly moral and intellectual person. Persons - honestly and extremely objective broadenning our insight into created to World-Economics by the intellect of MAN and His possibilities.
To the Laureate of The Prime of Memory Alfred Nobel in economics 1999yr. Ronald Kouz managed to see the fruits of his tractate and even to analyze beginnings and the conclusions of theorem created on the grounds of his works by progeny and termed His by name (!). Agree, what this fairly rare case, when to scientist to theorist manages while alive to see such high level not of only acknowledgement of his ideas but also their practical use in theoretical analysis. And main - manages self to appreciate the level of the consciousness of its intellectual achievements by pupils who in its life also achieved level by acknowledged specialists in science.
So much seriously all this accelerates the process of in-depth consciousness socioeconomic processes and the outlooks of development, we, like, only begin to understand. Actually specialists can to maintain the exit of economic theory on the brand-new complex disposition of objective-historic analysis, in the context of which aim to work the most «desperate revolution men in economics XXI century» Erik Rainert and his supporters overturning with ease that Davida Rikardo, of that Pol Samuelsona.
But how many of new and interesting history-theoretical material they beguile into scientific turnover! It is that is why, like, founders «will manifest extract» and will forgive «revolution men from economic theory» their thirst exterior bright the presentation of its findings, and we, with its side, shall assent to the real fact of existence and such estimations.
But, not in the grievance of «to bruisers with authority ons economy» will be said to, what till correctness and depth R.KOUZ by him still away off (possible, partly that is why, what R.KOUZ analyzed own theorem …). But this already subject matter of science researches, and to us advisable to appreciate the authenticity of that picture of interaction economic factors which presented on our court of two scientists of economist - one from positions West economic think, and other from position - East.
We and addict this work to produced economists who made, real, great deal for all us in XX century and at the beginning XXI centuries.
And if R.KOUZ turned our attention on the role of transaction expenses, on which it lay all responsibility for creation by the people of firms and enterprises that Valery Alexandrovich, virtual, explained us fundamental bases of the existence of these expenses, in which are capitalized all expenditures on the creation of really functioning internal organizations in World-Economics, when labor in insignificant technological changes persists creating basis (the base-line) of the existence of the complex economic systems of our civilization.
In modern economic literature so these questions meanwhile did not were not considered due to not to knowledge academic community with conclusions which can be made applying the concept of the law of the conservation of labor to the analysis of economic processes and transaction expenses.
We shall consider case history which consider and P.Samuelson and R.KOUZ, especial, treatment transactions last with null expenses. It is by the way, R.KOUZ elected novel admittance - he dismantles analysis which made his progeny and criticisms deepenning hereto insight into rent’s relations which self and considered from the positions of transaction expenses. AND Kouz mentions words its criticism Autena - «В examples Kouz result … will change in connection with responsibility, dependent from Ricardo’s rent that who will pollute and polluted. If and that who will pollute, and polluted act on the extreme district of earth, that who will pollute upon a balance must, if it carries responsibility for pollution, to cease its activity, and polluted will be dislodged, if responsibility lies on him». Not leading of all arguments, only shall note that on questions R.KOUZA: «How can be said that nobody has no right to pollute, if this right can be acquired for null price? As can be said that who-whether must it is patient to withstand damage, if for null price it can avoid him? » - to reply Auten, certain, did not can and not can.
But also self «father transaction expenses» analyzing classic example as to conflict between «by cattle breeders» and «by farmers», fairly novelly ascribes to formed rent’s relations naming «factors manufacturing beguiled into growing of cattle, «by cattle breeders», and the factors of manufacturing beguiled into processing of earth, - «by farmers». It practically considers most important price indicators speaking of - « It is until, meanwhile of rent of farmers it will more, than the value of annihilated crop, they still will gain clean winning from the farming continuation. In any legal conditions and farmers, and cattle breeders will continue its activity (accentuation my - A.V.».
And so whether it? Example so much fantasy and academic biased, what neither one head or specialist in agrarian-industrial complex without smile not can read this «deeply mental conclusion». It is especial, novella is perceived the computative part of this «analyze», when Kouz considering itself absolutely right writes: «If the rent of farmers are equal to 100 dollars of and the rent of cattle breeders are equal to 100 dollars, and the value of annihilated crop is equal to 50 dollars, the value of cumulative production will turn out to be larger, when and those and others will continue its activity, than failing this. In these circumstances the accession of the value of manufacturing will compose 150 dollars (amount rents for minus the values of annihilated crop). If whether farmers, whether cattle breeders will leave its activity, the accession of the value of manufacturing will drop till 100 dollars (accentuation my - A.V.)». Simpler and great fantasy on the topic of economic relations will not invent, but, name, fantasy (!), of which it is impossible to make neither design - neither practical, of neither theorics. And that's why - neither R.KOUZ, neither Samuelson, of neither all their criticism beginning from Velitsa and Autena, and finishing Erik Rainert, do not analyze of the peculiarities of operation tingeing in the capital of labor and by-pass principal question about the presence of organizational capital which formed, often, by centuries and even milleniums, and which, certain, need to ignore. Otherwise all assumptions - «fantasy about economic relations with clean list» - simply stop be perceived. Their apparent «arithmetical» argumentativeness on matter converted in very simple exercises as to addition and the subtraction of abstract figures which allegedly characterize the essential sides of manufacturing relations. The that is why further constructs of R.KOUZ the simple logical constructions of type - «we shall see, what will in case, when damage from annihilated less, than of the rent of cattle breeders, but more, than of the rent of farmers? » - does not deepen of finding understanding of the operation of real economics and even does not create insight intoes what those its elements (and is perceived, as «game imagination»).
Only assessment and accounting of the capital of organizing, let and not fairly exact, everything sets on its places. In real economics only on very volume the basement of the capital of organizing begin to affect real economic relations price proportions. Yes, many wanting, in order all was reflected in prices for, as in the integral indicators of results social labor. But is achieved this only in the very simplified models of authorial monographs as to economics, where in self general view are considered questions macro- and microeconomics.
If having complemented analysis Kouz, shall consider the same example with «by cattle breeders» and «farmers», but shall take as the assessment of the capital of organizing for «by cattle breeders» amount approximately in 1500 units, and for «farmers» - at the level 700 units, those questions of rent in 100 units in such amounts of engaged capital become undetermining. And «by cattle breeders» will sense itself and will behave into all «shallow conflicts», from position «force» which by him will lend capitalized in their technologies labor. Necessary was at the beginning XIX century to withstand the farmers of very bad loss, in order to convince society in necessities them to defend.,
Necessary was sharp to lift the effectiveness of agricultural manufacturing, to capitalize in technological basement the great masses of labor, in order in XX century in real life self fact annihilated caused storm «conflicts».
Position today so much changed, what neither reasonable estimations of performed damage in 80 cases from 100 not will give no result, and the beginnings of such position «by cattle breeders» in industrial countries necessary to search in the assessment of export availabilities as to meat production principally from Australia and Argentina, as well as of the possibility of deliveries their from other countries of Latin America.
But bit by bit and «farmers» can turn into industrially developed countries on position «by cattle breeders» …, if only leadership national economics will observe conditions VTO, by them developed. Third world by its production, especial, afro-complex - really can to fill markets, «throwing away» her in industrial world practically as to dumping prices for. But you can present today national markets USA of and West Europe, as absolutely open for the production of agro-sector countries VTO?
It is correct, no. But then concluding, by which «for the limits of firm manufacturing is subdued to price dynamics, and coordination turns out to be the result of the consecutive operations of exchange on market (accentuation my - A.V.» (R.KOUZ, Firm, market, right; 1993), disagrees to real economics, and is the description of very simplified model. Look at real unprice limitations which are applied today by most of countries, and you are convinced, what price stopped to be global handling factor. Those a few hundreds of international officials working in VTO, alively given account about annihilation of next custom barriers as to the next group of goods, certain, will insist on determining the significance of prices for, but real commodity floods grow away off not so, as reckon optimists globalization. Yes and that growth which to already sex spontaneously was consisted (really it was back to back), turns out to be deindustrialization not the only many countries of third world (Erik Raisner, 2010), but also the countries of Central Europe which were industrialization in the context of SEV (of The advice of Economic Mutual aid). In than a matter of?
It is possible, this growth of transaction expenses so much deformed real world economics which abandoned the alienations of the level of economic development? And like, not so from allineation, how many from ensuring internally of coordinated development national economy envisaging maximally possibly high employment in the most of countries which already cannot carry out leadership by world economic system?
It is correct, cannot, and main - does not set before self already even on serious meetings (Economic Forums, Summit G-20) of similar purposes.
Compare the decisions of United nations general assembly 60 and 70 years XX century. The and today's decisions of world economic leaders. Yes, meanwhile growth of world economics manages to hold at the level 2.3% per annum (2012 yr. and 2013 yr.) and do not forget that these middle figures. But because not only in 1970 yr. It was in rub time above, but also on 80 years him Wasily Wasilevich Leontjef along with appraisal group UNITED NATIONS planned at the level 6% and this without depressing activity in those years of the economic growth of China (!).
Yes, and not in China unsolvable for world economics a matter of? A matter of virtual - in waiver of the real coordination of the development of human capacity in the countries of third world and the substitution of this fundamental work of highly-qualified managers by political business conditions and the creation of the visibility of the active search of the political decisions artificially of bloated conflicts.
And one of the elements of this undersign visibility comes forward the concept of transaction expenses in treatment their determining significances for the firm creation.
See, to aim at abstractions for understanding deepening it is possible, but replace by generalized abstractions real technical-socio-economic analysis barren. Except, scientisms, when knowing terminology specialist in terms of transaction expenses can explain all anything (coverring the latter all peculiarities of existing and else developed technologies; As all variety socio-manufacturing systems else lately covered by term «capital»), we do not achieve deepening of understanding arising in the real economics of processes. And if no new aspects in understanding, then and abstraction begin to bear purely politic-speculative disposition. For creations by him vital truth already is needed fantasy on the topic of abvantages from interaction «by cattle breeders» and «farmers» in equality and the inequality of rent and est.
It is however, as soon as is introduced the capital of organising and the tempo of it capitalization in the rational expenditures of administrative labor, so ours already come forward on the first plan of the correlation of amounts thingies and alive labor which can sideways be reflected in prices for, but can and have no reflection in the misspelled systems of prices for. It is certain, advisably safe proportionality, but if was not set primarily such purpose, then and the achievement of proportionality will wear probabilistic disposition. And than the less real coordination of constantly performing processes, of topics more will be aspiration to simplified and, certain, not to existing abstractions for the creation of delusion to science spontaneous and often unsubstantiated managerial decisions.
Here is to such conclusions come on having taken apart one example mentioned Ronald Kouz which instead pendencies of the capitalization of labor expenditures and following analysis of the interaction of amounts thingies and alive labor was concentrated on stating inaccurate insight intoes results thingies and partially alive labor in other words transaction expenses.
If we emanate from the existence of the law of the conservation of labor, when amount of alive and thingies labor aims in the conservation of technological level to constant that even interaction «by cattle breeders» and «farmers» Ronald Kouz is presented in absolutely another light.
Self conflict which makes main R.KOUZ, to repulse to the background and we already consider question about the effectiveness of labor input in the realisation of two complex technological processes having the very significant masses the already of capitalized labor of organising in carefully mastered over centuries technologies, but distinguished essentially from each other as to the level of capitalization creative and administrative labor. Specially move from term «intellectual», because and administrative and creative labor have intellectual composing, though even qualitative understanding various.
And question from plane legal - relatively that «how and as must atone for losses», turns into the plane of the assessment of result labor and «by cattle breeders » and «farmers»; It results as to the content of social need fors the products of labor created as to two complex technologies.
And because, real, it is can it be tгuе administrative low level who brings to conflict, by maybe the serious object of theoretical economic analysis? As we can in earnest from general methodological positions dismantle of погашение damage which is caused by unreasonable and undesigned using resources bases (in this case - lands) of and its products?
Here is estimation of efficiency and the optimization of land use, in order to receive the balanced and necessary quantity of production from the definite district of the earth (of cereal and meat-milk), we not only can but also must carry out. But to us is necessary to know, as is spoken, target function - how many to us is necessary to receive production and what quality, and then already shall relate with the effectiveness of been used complex technologies and shall appreciate summary expenditures of alive and thingies labor and only next pass on to price correlations.
Maybe - this our modern methodological «invention»? Yes, no. This brightly is actualized was at the beginning XX century in East Europe (from Austria till Vladivostok) by academician V.S. Nemchinovym and his pupils, in particular, by professor, Dr (PhD) econ. V.G.LEBEDEVYM in dozens practical developments, but only not on primitive fantasy example, and in the complex economic system of the high-tech branches of popular economy on one sixth part of Earth. With its side lead in this work the only methodological base of this unique practical development which already is necessary to fulfil in the scales of all world economic system preserving motivational environment and distributed responsibility.
If earlier was fair to carry out calculations and to use their results it is possible was in the flow of decades (the example of the work of economic complex USSR), then today it is advisable every rub year to perform modernization in the realization of the programs of the development of high-tech branches composed on 25 and 50 years old, with allowance for not only inflationary processes of but also the possibilities of the appearance of absolutely new technologies and experimental industries.
R.KOUZ, Firm, market, right; 1993
Vasiljev Valery Alexandrovich, Vasiljev Alexander Valerievich The law PRESERVATION of a LABOUR the methodical fundamentals of the INDEX planning of development of small business. - Vestnik of Kazakstan's University economical, finance and international trade, N 1, 2013 http://www.group-global.org/en/publication/view/8686
Vasilev A.V., Vasilev V.A. The labor bases of the methodology of price formation. - Moscow-Mariupol, VU IESKI, 1993 - p.194
-------- Пересылаемое сообщение --------
to Nicola Bowen
Your adress was gave Ms Silvia.
And We sent our report to You
Yours Alexander Vasiljev
-------- Пересылаемое сообщение --------
От кого: "Silvia Peneva" <email@example.com>
Дата: Воскресенье, 22 мая 2016, 13:08 +03:00
Тема: Kazakhstan Investment Summit Re: Закон сохранения труда о транзакционных издержках Коуза: Памяти основоположников экономики ХХ1 столетия
I am on a business trip and will respond to you upon my return on 27th May. Alternatively please contact Nicola Bowen for assistance in my absence: firstname.lastname@example.org
If your query is regarding the Kazakhstan Investment Summit, please call me or text me on +447983800531.
|Категория: Law-Preservation-labour / "Все богатство из Труда"(Библия) по Закону Сохранения Труда | Добавил: Vasiljev (2016-05-31) | Автор: Alexander Vasiljev|
| Теги: |
|Всего комментариев: 0|
Онлайн всего: 1