The higher the productivity , the higher the living standard of the country. It also contributes in growth in output and income of the country.
Some economists argue that payment by cheque is the same as giving trade credit since both involve transactions which are not made in cash .
Resource markets will set incomes based on workers' contributions to the output of scarce goods and services
Physiocrats were a group of pre-classical economists in France who argued that the wealth of a country was made from the productive work of its labour, especially in agriculture. They advocated support and capital investment in agriculture.
Economists would argue that a price ceiling will lead to demand outrunning supply, leading to a shortage of the product. Although a few "real world" examples back this up, there are no set in stone answers to such complex issues.
National GDP is the yearly sum total monetary value of goods and services, but an economist's definition of 'productivity' is the value of labor output per unit input (hours worked). As framed, we're not comparing apples to apples, but the question seems more about whether GDP reflects 'true productivity'. Economists argue endlessly about what 'true productivity' is.Yet, one key sub-issue is whether services are really as valuable as goods. Is a $100 hair cut really worth as much as a $100 vacuum cleaner? Maybe not. Or on a national level, why with the world's largest GDP is the U.S.A. still dead last in trade deficit by an enormous margin? Services are harder to export than goods, but the size of that gap still seems kind of fishy, as it reflects how much the rest of the world values U.S. output, doesn't it? Goes with the feeling that Americans charge for massages and peddle financial paper everywhere, but they don't make 'things' any more.But let's try to bound the problem. On a whim, let's suppose we start with GDP but, to get a better handle on 'true productivity', you have to subtract off yearly trade deficit and yearly increases in national public and private debt. If so, U.S. GDP is now about $14 Trillion. Its public debt grew in 2008 by ~$1.8Trillion, private debt by ~$3 Trillion. So, our trial formula suggests that U.S. 'true productivity' was only $8.8 Trillion, or ~63% of nominal GDP. Goods constituted 1/3rd of U.S. GDP or $4.7 Trillion, which suggests that the remaining $9.3 Trillion of U.S. services was really worth only $4.1 Trillion, or 44% as much as U.S. goods, in terms of 'true productivity'.One may validly critique such a simple trial formula in many ways. Yet, it does yield an estimate of the true value of services that seems intuitively to be 'in the ballpark', i.e., not zero but, at slightly less than half, certainly not on a par with goods. Such a valuation also goes a long way to explain the U.S. trade deficit, as well as other seemingly inconsistent sets of facts gleaned from 'official' government stats.
Some economists argue that payment by cheque is the same as giving trade credit since both involve transactions which are not made in cash .
Some economists maintain that under the conditions of a liquidity trap. Today, most economists favor a low and steady rate of inflation.
Topic sentences introduce the main idea of a paragraph and provide a roadmap for the reader to understand the content that follows. They help maintain focus and coherence in writing by summarizing the key point or argument that will be discussed in the paragraph.
Capture the readers interest and to explain, or to discuss and argue for your thesis.
Resource markets will set incomes based on workers' contributions to the output of scarce goods and services
Physiocrats were a group of pre-classical economists in France who argued that the wealth of a country was made from the productive work of its labour, especially in agriculture. They advocated support and capital investment in agriculture.
a social term, not an important physical construction.
That depends on the person. It's important to some people, and isn't important to others. The ones to whom it's important might argue that it will be important to the others at some point in the future (i.e. after they're dead). The ones to whom it's not might argue the exact opposite.
Argue in Math is when you protest the answer or suggestion that is chosen. For example (4+2)3= 12 that equation is wrong so you put it in the right way, solve and explain it that would be called an argue.Hope this helped! :)- AestrellaT
There is a divided opinion between the free market(or classical) economists and Keynesian economists in this argument The Free market economists argue that the government shouldn't have any role whatsoever in interefering with the market and should let the market continues on its normal business cycle. The Keynesian economoists would argue that the government has a role to "tame" the economic cycles (making less boom and also less recession). However, economic cycles are a natural occurance in any economic system and can't be destroyed (or doesn't yet has an example of an economic cycle being destroyed.) Most governments however do interefere with the market (an example would be huge stimulus packages by governments during the global recession of 2008-2009).
Economists would argue that a price ceiling will lead to demand outrunning supply, leading to a shortage of the product. Although a few "real world" examples back this up, there are no set in stone answers to such complex issues.
Pennsylvania had more great people and They <lways had to argue about it!!! SO This is the best answer about this because Its Population And Important people are A lot to say so that had to argue!!!