Most economists believe that the most efficient way to allocate resources in an economy is through a market-based system, where prices are determined by supply and demand forces. This allows resources to flow to where they are most valued and needed, leading to optimal allocation and efficiency.
As with most arguments, this is a complex disagreement. Environmentalists believe that it is a company's duty to preserve the environment. Even though a company might have to pay more, it should opt for using renewable energy, recyclable materials, or more efficient machinery. However, economists believe that trying to minimize one's carbon footprint will be a financial disadvantage. They think that even though "green" techniques will benefit the environment, it will cost the company more, and it will lessen their profits. Thus, as companies try to find the balance between environmentally-friendly and cost-efficient, environmentalists and economists continue to battle it out.
Economists believe that all goods and services are scarce because all the resources used to create them are scarce. It's like a cycle. Land is all the natural resources that create all the goods and services, if this is scarce then there would be no coal or oil to fuel machines that help keep the natural resources going (capital). If there are no machines to work with then the job becomes hard for workers to do, meaning very few people would do such a job (labor). It's all a cycle of limited resources.
Most economists believe that money neutrality, the idea that changes in the money supply do not affect real variables like output and employment in the long run, has a significant impact on the economy.
True
i believe its balance of trade
Most economists believe the future of business cycles will continue to ebb and flow. They believe business cycles will continue to drive the economy.
As with most arguments, this is a complex disagreement. Environmentalists believe that it is a company's duty to preserve the environment. Even though a company might have to pay more, it should opt for using renewable energy, recyclable materials, or more efficient machinery. However, economists believe that trying to minimize one's carbon footprint will be a financial disadvantage. They think that even though "green" techniques will benefit the environment, it will cost the company more, and it will lessen their profits. Thus, as companies try to find the balance between environmentally-friendly and cost-efficient, environmentalists and economists continue to battle it out.
Economists believe that all goods and services are scarce because all the resources used to create them are scarce. It's like a cycle. Land is all the natural resources that create all the goods and services, if this is scarce then there would be no coal or oil to fuel machines that help keep the natural resources going (capital). If there are no machines to work with then the job becomes hard for workers to do, meaning very few people would do such a job (labor). It's all a cycle of limited resources.
As noted above, it is the so-called Keynesian economists who believe that the private sector is inherently unstable.
Most economists believe that money neutrality, the idea that changes in the money supply do not affect real variables like output and employment in the long run, has a significant impact on the economy.
True
i believe its balance of trade
Classical economists primarily ascribe to the principle of free markets and the idea of self-regulating economies. They believe that supply and demand dynamics naturally determine prices and allocate resources efficiently without the need for government intervention. This perspective emphasizes the importance of individual choice and competition in driving economic growth and innovation. Key figures, such as Adam Smith, advocate that individuals pursuing their self-interest ultimately benefit society as a whole.
Politics often emerges when individuals or groups have competing interests or goals that need to be addressed through decision-making and governance. Many political scientists believe that politics emerges as a way to manage conflicts and allocate resources within a society.
Laissez-faire refers to an economic philosophy advocating minimal government intervention in the marketplace. It emphasizes that free markets, driven by supply and demand, are the most efficient means of allocating resources and promoting economic growth. Proponents believe that allowing individuals and businesses to operate freely will lead to innovation and prosperity, while government interference can disrupt natural economic processes.
Congress
wait for the economy to achieve equilibrium