以電力控管來擴大內需
這天我中午下課後先去買貓指甲剪，再去了醫院看一下小綠眼。我沒在外面吃飯，想說回家烤麵包塗cheese順便看昨天因為PC power box突然宣告退休而沒看完的Patch Adams。回家時已經一點半了。門口的管理員跟我說沒有電梯可搭，因為在修電。我輕鬆的回答他：還好我不住14樓。
回到家之後，一眼就看到堆著像一座小山的臭衣服，決定先來洗衣服。按下洗衣機開關，「咦，為什麼電源燈沒亮呢，該不會是壞了嗎？最好這麼衰啦…」檢查插頭是插好的。「那怎麼會沒電呢？該不會貓幫我按了洗衣機的按鈕，過去的四天洗衣機都處在開機狀態吧！」但是即使是這樣我也只好認了，誰叫我這麼多天沒洗衣服。
走去浴室試開電燈，但是燈沒有亮，抽風扇也不會動。
想問管理員到底是整棟大樓都停電嗎，於是拿起住戶對講機，「沒有聲音」。
這是我突然發現不能開冰箱，冰箱裡的食物會因為溫度升高而壞掉。然後不能開電腦、無法上網（因為modem是吃電的）、不能洗衣服、不能烤食物。瞬間，我發現現代生活中的大部分事情都不能進行。又因為我住在市區狹小的公寓，沒有良好的採光，所以我也沒辦法利用太陽光來看書。雖然我有筆電，但是不能上網。而Patch Adam又放在PC的光碟機裡。「面對這樣的下午，我除了睡覺還能幹麻？」
在現在的社會，像我這種仰賴電腦、網路和冰箱而生活的阿宅是大多數。面對沒電的下午，我可以星巴克喝咖啡用電腦看書，可以去Mister Donut吃點心，可以去中友百貨逛街，可以去電影院看電影。當然我也可以去圖書館享受免費的冷氣和報紙。這樣的下午給我一個想法：政府可利用電力管控的方法來振興經濟。
配額給每一戶或每一公寓一定的電力，減少住宅的電源需求，將家庭電資源移轉到商業用電，減低商業用電的成本。接著因為阿宅們沒有辦法在家裡生活，所以必須出外消費，而這過程可達到擴大內需的目的。消費增加，營運成本下降，利潤提高，工作機會增加（因為要服務更多阿宅），阿宅有了工作，又可以繼續消費。
政府可考慮這樣的擴大內需方案，這個方案有幾個好處。第一，不用持續讓貨幣貶值以維持出口競爭力。第二，可不用發行消費卷等舉債方式來刺激消費。第三，可增加就業機會。第四，鼓勵阿宅踏出家門，與人又更多面對面接觸。第五，刺激筆記型電腦和電池的購買，這樣阿宅可以在家打字和單機板電玩。第六，因需求帶動電池等相關蓄電產品的研發。
希望部長和總統考慮一下。
Showing posts with label Economics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Economics. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 03, 2009
Wednesday, January 02, 2008
[Abstract Review] On the Origin of Money
On the Origin of Money
by Carl Menger
Economic Journal, vol. 2, (1892) p.239-55. Translated by C.A. Foley
[Abstract Review]
Menger talked about the development of money through the social/institutional structural. The article covered the genesis of media of exchange, the saleableness of different “commodity money”, and how metal became money. Most importantly, Menger stated the money is not generated by law but a product of social consensus. To understand the origin of money, it is worthy to find out why we need money?
Money has three functions in any economy: as a medium of exchange, as a unit of account, and as a store of value. The most original form of money is commodity goods: crops, live stocks, house, women, land, etc. At the time when people barter, people simply trade what they want with what they have. The system works fine except that the cost of transaction is high and trade faces its limitations. The saleableness of commodity is contingent to time and space; for example, the preservation of commodity increases the costs of transaction. If the commodity is a bunch of bananas, you’ll have to settle a deal before the fruit rotten. The price variations may also cause confusion in the market; for example, more bananas supply today and therefore purchasing power of bananas go down. The cost of carrying out transaction may exceed the benefits of exchange. The second challenge of using commodity goods as medium of exchange is how to store value. By this definition, banana is not a good candidate for money.
Recall that one of the primary functions of money is to store value; to ensure that the purchasing power don’t go down. Therefore, the best type of money is the kind that can reflect its true value during any circumstances. This corresponds to the “saleableness” of money, and the “market” condition.
From money’s three functions, it is easy to infer that money is not an institutional law but to a certain degree, a social consensus – the market. The value of money is free of government intervention. The logic is that government can impose a value, but it is left to the market to decide whether the law is reasonable. If the people do not accept such rule, they will trade using the way in which they believe is the most beneficial for themselves. This is most obvious in a time of hyperinflation when government issued currency loss value and the society exchanges using food, gold, or barter. The same case goes when the society loss faith in the government issued currency and decides to hold on to other medium of exchange that is better at storing value.
Money is mostly market-dependent and government-independent. Government can issue money in aiding the cost of transaction or provide a commonly accepted medium of exchange, but cannot prohibit other forms of mediums. It is the society to decide which type of exchange that is most efficient and the market decides the value or price of each medium of exchange.
ECON 500500 Reading and Writing in Economics
January 2nd, 2008
by Carl Menger
Economic Journal, vol. 2, (1892) p.239-55. Translated by C.A. Foley
[Abstract Review]
Menger talked about the development of money through the social/institutional structural. The article covered the genesis of media of exchange, the saleableness of different “commodity money”, and how metal became money. Most importantly, Menger stated the money is not generated by law but a product of social consensus. To understand the origin of money, it is worthy to find out why we need money?
Money has three functions in any economy: as a medium of exchange, as a unit of account, and as a store of value. The most original form of money is commodity goods: crops, live stocks, house, women, land, etc. At the time when people barter, people simply trade what they want with what they have. The system works fine except that the cost of transaction is high and trade faces its limitations. The saleableness of commodity is contingent to time and space; for example, the preservation of commodity increases the costs of transaction. If the commodity is a bunch of bananas, you’ll have to settle a deal before the fruit rotten. The price variations may also cause confusion in the market; for example, more bananas supply today and therefore purchasing power of bananas go down. The cost of carrying out transaction may exceed the benefits of exchange. The second challenge of using commodity goods as medium of exchange is how to store value. By this definition, banana is not a good candidate for money.
Recall that one of the primary functions of money is to store value; to ensure that the purchasing power don’t go down. Therefore, the best type of money is the kind that can reflect its true value during any circumstances. This corresponds to the “saleableness” of money, and the “market” condition.
From money’s three functions, it is easy to infer that money is not an institutional law but to a certain degree, a social consensus – the market. The value of money is free of government intervention. The logic is that government can impose a value, but it is left to the market to decide whether the law is reasonable. If the people do not accept such rule, they will trade using the way in which they believe is the most beneficial for themselves. This is most obvious in a time of hyperinflation when government issued currency loss value and the society exchanges using food, gold, or barter. The same case goes when the society loss faith in the government issued currency and decides to hold on to other medium of exchange that is better at storing value.
Money is mostly market-dependent and government-independent. Government can issue money in aiding the cost of transaction or provide a commonly accepted medium of exchange, but cannot prohibit other forms of mediums. It is the society to decide which type of exchange that is most efficient and the market decides the value or price of each medium of exchange.
ECON 500500 Reading and Writing in Economics
January 2nd, 2008
Monday, December 17, 2007
[Abstract Review] Some Economics of Global Warming
Some Economics of Global Warming
By Thomas C. Schelling
The American Economic Review, Vol. 82, No. 1 (Mar., 1992), pp. 1-14
[Abstract Review]
The author discussed the effects on global warming on people, enviornment, economy, and some tackling strategies. The paper started off by pointing out the inappropriate metophar of greenhouse and the name should be replaced by "smudgepot effect". But since it is too late to change the term, it is more practical to focus on the effects on people. People accept discontinuous climate change when they “migrate” from northeast to southest; however, continuous change of climate is unbearable. Additionaly, the media discuss “hotter summer”, but never “warmer winter.” Interestingly enough, people 100 years ago would probably have appreciated a warmer winter.
Business activities such as finance or manufacture are little affected by climate; similarly for healther care, education, or broadcasting. Climate change becomes an issue when it is about enviornment, animals, or argiculture. As some argue that comfort is worth considering, it is fortunately that the models predict a greater impact upon winter. Overall, climate migrates slowly and does not make significant impact on human life unless it is catastrophy.
Nevertheless, global warming is still an ongoing issue. The question is what are the costs of reducing carbon emission? Developed countries have no self-interest in reducing 2% of GNP perpetuity to curtailing carbon consumption. Shall developing countries scarfice their citizins’ welfare and economic development? China accounts for 25% of emissions but expect to increase to 50%. That is a nation with power to make a difference to the world by commiting to a “social contract” for global warming, but will she?
Alternative solution is genoenginnering; for example, remove mature trees and storing them anaerobically; enhancing oceanic photosynthesis by “fertailizing” the ocean with iron; reforstation, or put something in orbit to reflect incoming sunlight and reverse the imbalance caused by greenhouse gases. Schelling believed that if genoenginnering is feasible, international greenhouse diplomacy will be transformed (p. 10).
Schelling stated that the best plan is the Marshall Plan dollars. Unfortunately, there was never a formula for distributing Marshall Plan dollars. Global warming was a problem in 1992; 15 years later, there is still no real solution.
ECON 500500 Reading and Writing in Economics
December 17th, 2007
By Thomas C. Schelling
The American Economic Review, Vol. 82, No. 1 (Mar., 1992), pp. 1-14
[Abstract Review]
The author discussed the effects on global warming on people, enviornment, economy, and some tackling strategies. The paper started off by pointing out the inappropriate metophar of greenhouse and the name should be replaced by "smudgepot effect". But since it is too late to change the term, it is more practical to focus on the effects on people. People accept discontinuous climate change when they “migrate” from northeast to southest; however, continuous change of climate is unbearable. Additionaly, the media discuss “hotter summer”, but never “warmer winter.” Interestingly enough, people 100 years ago would probably have appreciated a warmer winter.
Business activities such as finance or manufacture are little affected by climate; similarly for healther care, education, or broadcasting. Climate change becomes an issue when it is about enviornment, animals, or argiculture. As some argue that comfort is worth considering, it is fortunately that the models predict a greater impact upon winter. Overall, climate migrates slowly and does not make significant impact on human life unless it is catastrophy.
Nevertheless, global warming is still an ongoing issue. The question is what are the costs of reducing carbon emission? Developed countries have no self-interest in reducing 2% of GNP perpetuity to curtailing carbon consumption. Shall developing countries scarfice their citizins’ welfare and economic development? China accounts for 25% of emissions but expect to increase to 50%. That is a nation with power to make a difference to the world by commiting to a “social contract” for global warming, but will she?
Alternative solution is genoenginnering; for example, remove mature trees and storing them anaerobically; enhancing oceanic photosynthesis by “fertailizing” the ocean with iron; reforstation, or put something in orbit to reflect incoming sunlight and reverse the imbalance caused by greenhouse gases. Schelling believed that if genoenginnering is feasible, international greenhouse diplomacy will be transformed (p. 10).
Schelling stated that the best plan is the Marshall Plan dollars. Unfortunately, there was never a formula for distributing Marshall Plan dollars. Global warming was a problem in 1992; 15 years later, there is still no real solution.
ECON 500500 Reading and Writing in Economics
December 17th, 2007
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
[Abstract Review] The Mathematization of Economic Theory
The Mathematization of Economic Theory
By. Gerard Debreu.
The American Economic Review, 81(1), May 1991, pp. 1-7.
The introduction of Mathematics into Economics in the early 20th century radically changed the analytical methodology and tools in solving economics problem. It profoundly changed the natural of our profession. In the five short decades, mathematics - formulas and derivations, solved economic models with more clarity, generality, rigor, and simplicity. It becomes a “common language” for economic theory. Mathematics opens an efficient scrutiny for logical errors. The great logic solidity contributes to a fast construction of economic theories. Some of which take a comprehensive view of the economic system.
The raising importance of mathematics can be observed from the increasing pages of periodicals, the size of ES, and the graduate admissions. From 1935 to 1977, the pages increased 12 times, from 400 to 5000 pages. 1944 was the milestone for such growth and it was also the year John von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern published the Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. The Fellows of Econometrics Society (ES) also contributes to the vast growth. In the 13 research-doctorate programs in US, over 50% of the faculty are ES member. Graduate school also requires proficiency in calculus and linear algebra upon admission. The trend is inevitable.
Physics and economics served some similarity as the application of mathematics benefited the development of both discipline. Abstract concepts were captured through axioms, equations, and calculations. But the experimental feature of physics allowed it to violate the canons of mathematical deduction. Economic theory adhere to the rules of logical discourse, but must renounce the facility of internal inconsistency because its’ lack of experiment base.
The advantages that Mathematics brought are overwhelming. Mathematical analysis in economics is no longer an option, but more or less something that judge your work and career. “The very choice of the questions to which he tries to find answers is influenced by his mathematical background” (Debreu, pg. 5). The danger is whether economics has become secondary, that the strong and solid foundation of economic theory is dominated by the fancy equations and proofs?
The over rely on mathematics is risky if economics theory weakens. It opens a gate for irresponsible models where the equations are fancy but the logics are controversy. For example the causal relationship that is observed in equation: does it really inference a causal relationship or there might be a third cause? This requires careful examinations of economics logics to avoid fallacy.
The allowance for experiment should be developed in economics. Experiment economics is already conducted on micro-level behaviors; it is an alternative tool to examine models or theories. Experiment in macro-level – national economy – is at the moment improbable because the volume is large and cost may be high.
Mathematization in economics is not perfect. It does not capture all of the factors, for example - kindness. But it did have its contribution – a common language for scholars to communicate without misunderstanding.
ECON500500 Reading and Writing in Economics
Abstract review
By. Gerard Debreu.
The American Economic Review, 81(1), May 1991, pp. 1-7.
The introduction of Mathematics into Economics in the early 20th century radically changed the analytical methodology and tools in solving economics problem. It profoundly changed the natural of our profession. In the five short decades, mathematics - formulas and derivations, solved economic models with more clarity, generality, rigor, and simplicity. It becomes a “common language” for economic theory. Mathematics opens an efficient scrutiny for logical errors. The great logic solidity contributes to a fast construction of economic theories. Some of which take a comprehensive view of the economic system.
The raising importance of mathematics can be observed from the increasing pages of periodicals, the size of ES, and the graduate admissions. From 1935 to 1977, the pages increased 12 times, from 400 to 5000 pages. 1944 was the milestone for such growth and it was also the year John von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern published the Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. The Fellows of Econometrics Society (ES) also contributes to the vast growth. In the 13 research-doctorate programs in US, over 50% of the faculty are ES member. Graduate school also requires proficiency in calculus and linear algebra upon admission. The trend is inevitable.
Physics and economics served some similarity as the application of mathematics benefited the development of both discipline. Abstract concepts were captured through axioms, equations, and calculations. But the experimental feature of physics allowed it to violate the canons of mathematical deduction. Economic theory adhere to the rules of logical discourse, but must renounce the facility of internal inconsistency because its’ lack of experiment base.
The advantages that Mathematics brought are overwhelming. Mathematical analysis in economics is no longer an option, but more or less something that judge your work and career. “The very choice of the questions to which he tries to find answers is influenced by his mathematical background” (Debreu, pg. 5). The danger is whether economics has become secondary, that the strong and solid foundation of economic theory is dominated by the fancy equations and proofs?
The over rely on mathematics is risky if economics theory weakens. It opens a gate for irresponsible models where the equations are fancy but the logics are controversy. For example the causal relationship that is observed in equation: does it really inference a causal relationship or there might be a third cause? This requires careful examinations of economics logics to avoid fallacy.
The allowance for experiment should be developed in economics. Experiment economics is already conducted on micro-level behaviors; it is an alternative tool to examine models or theories. Experiment in macro-level – national economy – is at the moment improbable because the volume is large and cost may be high.
Mathematization in economics is not perfect. It does not capture all of the factors, for example - kindness. But it did have its contribution – a common language for scholars to communicate without misunderstanding.
ECON500500 Reading and Writing in Economics
Abstract review
[Abstract Review] Economics in Action: Ideas, Institutions, Policies
Economics in Action: Ideas, Institutions, Policies
The American Economic Review, Vol. 85, No. 2, Papers and Proceedings of the Hundredth and Seventh Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association Washington, DC, January 6-8, 1995. (May, 1995), pp. 1-8.
George P. Shultz
Shultz suggested that market mechanism and minimum government intervention will lead to economic golden age. He supported the ending of the Bretton Woods system in the Nixon administration and several tax reform acts in his cabinet jobs.
A economy that emphasis on resource allocation, market- and enterprise-base policu, and education create the private incentives necessary for economic growth. Quality education produces skilled and productive labor that is important for political change and open society. A society open to change is an innovative one.
Shultz’s backgrounds lead him to believe that a change in the exchange rate is crucial. Government intervention will do more harm than good because the global economy and the volume of exchange market is too big to manipulate. Moreover, asynchrony can lessen extremes and maintain the equilibrium as a whole. Besides, there is always new entrant and it is unlikely for any businessman to ignore a market that is full of opportunities. In short, Shultz concluded that “the market will win in the end anyway, and the cost of intervention can be high” (pg. 4).
In addition, he observed the inefficiency in BWI and suggested the two institutions to merge and set out missions to emphasize on encouraging private investment and open trade. Moreover, IMF no longer has a par-value exchange system to monitor, and ideas on development also shifted from public sector dominance towards private enterprise and free markets.
Finally, future investment depends on capital saving. To do so, government should reduce deficit, stabilize political condition, ban corruption, and allow privatization. Privatization is most important because it turns “nobody’s money” into “somebody’s money”.
In short, Shultz suggested that open market and freer trade is the key to society’s prosperity. But I argue that such system of openness and international trade may not be as beneficial or else the world is already in harmony. First, the transformation of society is costly if supporting policies are not well planned. International trade is also costly for the environment. Producing at a lower cost did not take account of the carbon dioxide emissions and global warming effects generated through transporting goods. It also forgoes the idea of energy waste and competition for resources. Although resources, in economics sense, cannot be scarce, but environmental damages is inevitable. Second, private incentives do not always coherent between parties. Government should intervene moderately providing the necessary environment, specifically law and orders. Finally, reviewing the past 5 years, the world economy is in chaos. The code of ethics in business world had vanished into the air. Corruption did not cease. I would think the problem is not in open trade and free market, the key is the ethics issue in capitalism that Marx had predicted. The economy is not at golden age, yet.
ECON 500500 Reading and Writing in Economics
Abstract review
The American Economic Review, Vol. 85, No. 2, Papers and Proceedings of the Hundredth and Seventh Annual Meeting of the American Economic Association Washington, DC, January 6-8, 1995. (May, 1995), pp. 1-8.
George P. Shultz
Shultz suggested that market mechanism and minimum government intervention will lead to economic golden age. He supported the ending of the Bretton Woods system in the Nixon administration and several tax reform acts in his cabinet jobs.
A economy that emphasis on resource allocation, market- and enterprise-base policu, and education create the private incentives necessary for economic growth. Quality education produces skilled and productive labor that is important for political change and open society. A society open to change is an innovative one.
Shultz’s backgrounds lead him to believe that a change in the exchange rate is crucial. Government intervention will do more harm than good because the global economy and the volume of exchange market is too big to manipulate. Moreover, asynchrony can lessen extremes and maintain the equilibrium as a whole. Besides, there is always new entrant and it is unlikely for any businessman to ignore a market that is full of opportunities. In short, Shultz concluded that “the market will win in the end anyway, and the cost of intervention can be high” (pg. 4).
In addition, he observed the inefficiency in BWI and suggested the two institutions to merge and set out missions to emphasize on encouraging private investment and open trade. Moreover, IMF no longer has a par-value exchange system to monitor, and ideas on development also shifted from public sector dominance towards private enterprise and free markets.
Finally, future investment depends on capital saving. To do so, government should reduce deficit, stabilize political condition, ban corruption, and allow privatization. Privatization is most important because it turns “nobody’s money” into “somebody’s money”.
In short, Shultz suggested that open market and freer trade is the key to society’s prosperity. But I argue that such system of openness and international trade may not be as beneficial or else the world is already in harmony. First, the transformation of society is costly if supporting policies are not well planned. International trade is also costly for the environment. Producing at a lower cost did not take account of the carbon dioxide emissions and global warming effects generated through transporting goods. It also forgoes the idea of energy waste and competition for resources. Although resources, in economics sense, cannot be scarce, but environmental damages is inevitable. Second, private incentives do not always coherent between parties. Government should intervene moderately providing the necessary environment, specifically law and orders. Finally, reviewing the past 5 years, the world economy is in chaos. The code of ethics in business world had vanished into the air. Corruption did not cease. I would think the problem is not in open trade and free market, the key is the ethics issue in capitalism that Marx had predicted. The economy is not at golden age, yet.
ECON 500500 Reading and Writing in Economics
Abstract review
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)