Germany's economy continues to sink; will politicians reform?

[Kidlicious]

As I've already stated. You are right assuming that resources stay employed. But the question is whether they will or not.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Kidicious
As I've already stated. You are right assuming that resources stay employed. But the question is whether they will or not.

Actually, resources can't be employed- they can be utilized, but not employed.

He is simply statting that if the one man with a job in a three man town can make 5 chairs out of one tree, whereas before he could only make 3, the town's income has risen, thought it has done nothing to improve the abysmal economic conditions.

[Adam Smith]

For the last time, it does not matter whether the all resources are employed or not. One or both of the workers can spend time sunning themselves on the beach. You still have more output from the same set of resources, so income goes up.

I really don't have time for this. Bye.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Kidicious
Here's a good article for you Oerdin. This guy seems to have a pretty good handle on the subject.

About.com

Kid, you and I both know that article doesn't say a word about productivity growth causing recessions. Everything I've read says productivity growth is good for the economy. Logic says productivity growth is good for the long term health of the economy.

You're going to need real evidence to prove otherwise.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Adam Smith
For the last time, it does not matter whether the all resources are employed or not. One or both of the workers can spend time sunning themselves on the beach. You still have more output from the same set of resources, so income goes up.

I really don't have time for this. Bye.

For the last time you don't have more output if those resources aren't employed. Sorry deary, that's the way it is.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Kidicious



For the last time you don't have more output if those resources aren't employed. Sorry deary, that's the way it is.

Yes you do,in fact, that is the very notion of rise in productivity, that output rose without an increase in the use of resources.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by GePap


Actually, resources can't be employed- they can be utilized, but not employed.

He is simply statting that if the one man with a job in a three man town can make 5 chairs out of one tree, whereas before he could only make 3, the town's income has risen, thought it has done nothing to improve the abysmal economic conditions.

The income has risen if everyone else does the same amount of work as they were doing. But the real economy is complex and dynamic. In the real economy productivity gains mean unemployment. Some times there are dynamics in the economy to create jobs to offset that and sometimes there aren't. When the economy isn't working properly productivity gains only make things worse.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by GePap


Yes you do,in fact, that is the very notion of rise in productivity, that output rose without an increase in the use of resources.

That doesn't mean that you can't have productivity growth with a decrease in employment (utilization).

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Oerdin


Kid, you and I both know that article doesn't say a word about productivity growth causing recessions. Everything I've read says productivity growth is good for the economy. Logic says productivity growth is good for the long term health of the economy.

You're going to need real evidence to prove otherwise.

If you understand the article you understand what I'm saying. Did you get the part where it said that a recession is an excess in supply? How does an increase in supply balance an economy where supply is already in excess?

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Adam Smith
For the last time, it does not matter whether the all resources are employed or not. One or both of the workers can spend time sunning themselves on the beach. You still have more output from the same set of resources, so income goes up.

I really don't have time for this. Bye.

Definition: Total output divided by the number of workers employed i.e. productivity.


biz.ed

Yes it is dependent on the number of workers employed.

Pwned.

[Kidlicious]

Here's another one from the Oxford Dictionary of Economics.

... Productivity is also affected by the level of output, if returns to scale are not constant.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Kidicious


That doesn't mean that you can't have productivity growth with a decrease in employment (utilization).

Of course it doesn't, that is one of the points that AS is making.

[Kidlicious]

No he's not. He's trying to argue that any increase in productivity results in an increase in output, and possibly he is implying that it results in an increase in employment.

[Kontiki]

Communist beer goggles again, Kid? Your link in biz.ed is for output per worker. Look up productivity from the same site:

Productivity - The efficiency with which the factors of production are used. It can be calculated by taking total output and dividing by the number of factors of production. The higher this figure, the more productive the factors of production are.

In real economics, factors of production include more than human bodies.

[Kidlicious]

Originally posted by Adam Smith
For the last time, it does not matter whether the all resources are employed or not. One or both of the workers can spend time sunning themselves on the beach. You still have more output from the same set of resources, so income goes up.

I really don't have time for this. Bye.