在经济学导论课程中继续教授“供给与需求”而不是“需求与成本”的深刻含义——一种不平等的交换应用

Q3 Social Sciences
Ron Baiman
{"title":"在经济学导论课程中继续教授“供给与需求”而不是“需求与成本”的深刻含义——一种不平等的交换应用","authors":"Ron Baiman","doi":"10.1504/IJPEE.2019.10023250","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper focuses on how two iconic memes of neoclassical (NC) introductory economics provide the ideological basis for the neoliberal perfectly competitive free market (PCFM) and free trade (FT) economic doctrines. The paper argues that the supply and demand (SDM) and Ricardian comparative advantage (RCA) memes that ostensibly support these doctrines are fundamentally in error both economically and logically, and should be replaced in introductory economics teaching by demand and cost (DCM) and unequal exchange (UE) memes, respectively. The DCM is explained in detail and used to analyse all situations to which the SDM is usually applied. The UE meme, within a DCM framework, is then used to derive principles for fair and sustainable international trade and finance. The paper shows that the DCM and UE memes provide more realistic, equitable, and sustainable views of production and international economies than the fictional SDM and RCA memes, which have become ubiquitous, even in heterodox textbooks.","PeriodicalId":52200,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The profound implications of continuing to teach 'supply and demand' instead of 'demand and cost' in intro economics courses - an unequal exchange application\",\"authors\":\"Ron Baiman\",\"doi\":\"10.1504/IJPEE.2019.10023250\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper focuses on how two iconic memes of neoclassical (NC) introductory economics provide the ideological basis for the neoliberal perfectly competitive free market (PCFM) and free trade (FT) economic doctrines. The paper argues that the supply and demand (SDM) and Ricardian comparative advantage (RCA) memes that ostensibly support these doctrines are fundamentally in error both economically and logically, and should be replaced in introductory economics teaching by demand and cost (DCM) and unequal exchange (UE) memes, respectively. The DCM is explained in detail and used to analyse all situations to which the SDM is usually applied. The UE meme, within a DCM framework, is then used to derive principles for fair and sustainable international trade and finance. The paper shows that the DCM and UE memes provide more realistic, equitable, and sustainable views of production and international economies than the fictional SDM and RCA memes, which have become ubiquitous, even in heterodox textbooks.\",\"PeriodicalId\":52200,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-08-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPEE.2019.10023250\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPEE.2019.10023250","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文重点研究了新古典经济学的两个标志性模因如何为新自由主义完全竞争自由市场和自由贸易经济理论提供意识形态基础。本文认为,表面上支持这些理论的供应与需求(SDM)和里卡德比较优势(RCA)模因在经济和逻辑上都存在根本错误,应该在经济学导论教学中分别用需求与成本(DCM)和不平等交换(UE)模因取代。DCM进行了详细解释,并用于分析SDM通常应用的所有情况。然后,在DCM框架内,UE模因被用来推导公平和可持续的国际贸易和金融原则。论文表明,DCM和UE模因提供了比虚构的SDM和RCA模因更现实、更公平、更可持续的生产和国际经济观,这些模因已经变得无处不在,甚至在异端教科书中也是如此。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The profound implications of continuing to teach 'supply and demand' instead of 'demand and cost' in intro economics courses - an unequal exchange application
This paper focuses on how two iconic memes of neoclassical (NC) introductory economics provide the ideological basis for the neoliberal perfectly competitive free market (PCFM) and free trade (FT) economic doctrines. The paper argues that the supply and demand (SDM) and Ricardian comparative advantage (RCA) memes that ostensibly support these doctrines are fundamentally in error both economically and logically, and should be replaced in introductory economics teaching by demand and cost (DCM) and unequal exchange (UE) memes, respectively. The DCM is explained in detail and used to analyse all situations to which the SDM is usually applied. The UE meme, within a DCM framework, is then used to derive principles for fair and sustainable international trade and finance. The paper shows that the DCM and UE memes provide more realistic, equitable, and sustainable views of production and international economies than the fictional SDM and RCA memes, which have become ubiquitous, even in heterodox textbooks.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education
International Journal of Pluralism and Economics Education Social Sciences-Sociology and Political Science
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
12
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信