Luck as an explantion has been explored and dismissed by the economics profession. However, from what I read, there are two pieces missing from the luck explanation.
1) Luck is largely explained in terms of multiple equilibria. Many economists oppose this by saying this explanation might explain difference in the short run, but fail to explain the long run stagnation as the country should have coordinated better. Firstly, time allows for coordination is doubtful. Second, and more pertinent to my point is that these economists neglect the dynamics inherent in the economics matter. One result of equilibrium have influence over latter developments. Because of an innovation as a result of a good equilibrium, the economy might be able to revolutionize its whole economy, making itself much more advanced than other economies. They might gain from this afvantage by enjoying more surplus from trade. Apersonal experience on this dynamics is ....
2) randomness
No comments:
Post a Comment