scholarly journals Teori ekonomi David Ricardo

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Musdalifah
Keyword(s):  

Artikel ini membahas tentang Teori ekonomi David Ricardo

1952 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 130 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emile James ◽  
P. Sraffa ◽  
M. H. Dobb ◽  
David Ricardo
Keyword(s):  

1953 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 87
Author(s):  
David McCord Wright ◽  
Piero Sraffa ◽  
M. H. Dobb ◽  
David Ricardo
Keyword(s):  

1956 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 377
Author(s):  
David McCord Wright ◽  
David Ricardo ◽  
Piero Sraffa ◽  
M. H. Dobb
Keyword(s):  

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Toni Pierenkemper

Realökonomische Probleme haben zu allen Zeiten die Theorien der Ökonomie und ihrer großen Denker beeinflusst. Wichtige Themen der Ökonomie sind das gesamtwirtschaftliche Wachstum, Verteilungsprobleme, individuelle Nutzenmaximierung, Keynesianismus, Monetarismus – und ganz neue Ansätze wie Evolutorik, Spieltheorie oder Verhaltensökonomie, die ihr Potenzial noch beweisen müssen. Sie verbinden sich in der Moderne mit Namen von Ökonomen wie Adam Smith, Robert Malthus, David Ricardo, John Stuart Mill, Friedrich List, Karl Marx, John Maynard Keynes oder Milton Friedman. Oder die Betrachtung der Ökonomie verdichtet sich in Stichworten wie Marginalanalyse, Historische Schule, Neoklassik, Institutionalismus, Neue-Institutionenökonomik und Monetarismus – neuerdings auch Evolutorik, Verhaltensökonomik oder Spieltheorie. Für alle, die zur Ökonomie gründlich aufbereitetes und grundlegendes Überblickswissen mit Prüfungsrelevanz suchen.


Protrepsis ◽  
2018 ◽  
pp. 61-76
Author(s):  
Victor M. Hernández Márquez

El presente trabajo se propone exponer y discutir la recepción temprana de Das Kapital en el campo de las ciencias sociales, enfocándose en el análisis que Thorstein Veblen hizo a principios del siglo XX. Con una formación sólida como filósofo y como economista, Veblen era la persona mejor preparada para mostrar las virtudes y defectos de la teoría de Marx. Según su análisis, el cual denomino interpretación holista, la originalidad de Marx recae en la forma como amalgama elementos pertenecientes a dos tradiciones de pensamiento completamente ajenas entre sí; es decir, el idealismo alemán, y en particular, al teoría de Hegel, con la economía política inglesa de Adam Smith, Jeremy Bentham y David Ricardo. Por consiguiente, dado que la fuerza de la teoría del capital no recaen en los elementos considerados de manera aislada, sino en la forma en que han sido incorporado en una estructura lógica fuerte, sostiene Veblen, no tiene sentido discutir la teoría de Marx analizando cada uno de sus elementos por separado; proceder de esta forma solo puede dar lugar al tipo de incomprensiones que han provocado por igual criticas desafortunadas y extensos comentarios insustanciales, algunos de los cuales es posible encontrar aún en la literatura.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nurul Inayah
Keyword(s):  

Artikel ini membahas mengenai teori ekonomi david ricardo, thomas robert malthus dan jean baptistie say


2021 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew McCaffrey

Economics has long history of “rehabilitations,” including W.H. Hutt’s rehabilitation of Say’s law, and Alfred Marshall’s attempt to rehabilitate David Ricardo. The rehabilitation of Frank A. Fetter should be as important as either of these, especially for economists working in the contemporary Austrian tradition. The historical records reveal that for the last century there has been underway a nearly unbroken series of efforts, especially by Austrian economists, to rehabilitate Fetter’s contributions and use them to revitalize economic theory. This paper relates this history, which chronicles the rise, decline, and rise again of one of the great American economic theorists. Yet crucially, this is not a story about Fetter alone, but also of the fortunes of the Austrian school and its rise, decline, and renaissance.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naoki Odanaka

This paper analyzes the impact and influence of the memory of kurofune (black ships), iron-armored battleships of the United States Navy led by Commodore Matthew Perry (1794-1858) that came to Japan in 1853, exerted over the course of industrialization in early Meiji Japan, which is the period from the Meiji Restoration (1868) to the Sino-Japanese war (1894-5). Using the comparative advantage theory formalized by David Ricardo (1772-1823) as an analytical tool, we consider the arguments of major contemporary Japanese policymakers as the object of analysis. We have three conclusions. First, the economic policy adopted by early Meiji policymakers generally followed the comparative advantage theory. Second, their goal was not the monoculturization of the comparative advantage goods, but the heavy industrialization necessary for avoiding the colonization: export of comparative advantage goods was a means to collect money for it. Third, they regarded the development of transportation-related industries as important because it would hasten the “movement” of men and goods, which would lead to the increased wealth and which was symbolized by the kurofune in the collective memory.


2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (2) ◽  
pp. 152-165
Author(s):  
Adolfo Rodríguez Herrera

Smith is considered the father of the labour theory of value developed by David Ricardo and Karl Marx and simultaneously of the cost-of-production theory of value developed by John Stuart Mill and Alfred Marshall. This polysemy is partly because Smith is developping the terminology to refer to value and measure of value, and often uses it with much imprecision. That has led to different interpretations about his position on these issues, most of them derived from an error of interpretation of Ricardo and Marx. This paper reviews the concepts developed by Smith to formulate his theory of value (value, real price and exchangeable value). Our interpretation of his texts on value does not coincide with what has traditionally been done. According to our interpretation, it would not be correct the criticism made by Ricardo and Marx on Smith’s position about the role of labour as measure of value. For these authors, Smith is not consistent in proposing that the value of a commodity is defined or measured as the amount of labour necessary to produce it and simultaneously as the amount of labour that can be purchased by this commodity. We try to show that for Smith the labour has a double role –as source and measure of value–, and that to it is due the confusion that generates his use of some terms: Smith proposes labour as a measure of value because he conceives it as a source of value. With this interpretation it becomes clear, paradoxically, that Smith holds a labour theory of value that substantially corresponds to the one later developed by Ricardo and Marx.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document