In neoclassical theory, price is a market phenomenon associated with the monetary value of the utility of a good. Price is a mechanism for balancing supply and demand, and it is this relationship of demand, supply and price that mutual influence- supply and demand affect the price, but the price, in turn, determines supply and demand - is the main subject of analysis. Not the search for labor value as the basis of price, but the mechanism of fluctuations in market prices - this is what the attention of neoclassical theorists is focused on.

Marshall tried to combine the approaches of marginalism, classical political economy and the historical school in his work. Some chapters of the Principles ... are clearly written from the standpoint of the historical school. Like the classics, he brought to the fore the problems of economic growth and distribution. In his theory of value, he included an analysis of production costs, which was also close to the teachings of the classics. It is no coincidence that the term neoclassical was subsequently applied to Marshall and his followers, emphasizing that their ideas in a certain sense continue the ideas of the classical school. However, in fact, the main content of the book and the main achievements of Marshall are connected with the development of marginalist microeconomics. Therefore, the term neoclassical theory over time (from the 1950s and 60s) began to be called marginalism.

It cannot be considered accidental that, in contrast to the labor theory of value, in the 70s. 19th century a non-labor concept (a set of views) of value appeared, namely, the theory of marginal utility. It was founded by the neoclassical (neo in Greek - new) direction of economic theory. Neoclassicists gave their explanation of the cost (value) and the price of goods from the standpoint of the economic psychology of the buyer. The main provisions of this theory are as follows.

The most prominent representatives of the neoclassical theory of growth are the American economist R. Solow and the English economist J. Mead. This theory got its name because it borrowed from the neoclassicists (the English economist A. Marshall) the main initial premises and tools of analysis. Neoclassical growth theories are based on the assumption of free competition, under which the owners of factors of production are rewarded in accordance with the so-called marginal products (which means wages, profits and rents). According to supporters of the neoclassical concept of economic growth, the main factors of production are fully used, which is achieved by the mechanism of free competition that affects the prices of production factors.

Even more discrepancies among neoclassicals and Keynesians in the interpretation of the configuration of the aggregate supply curve AS, as discussed in Ch. 18. In accordance with neoclassical theory, the supply curve is a vertical line; its position is determined by the natural rate of unemployment, capital expenditures and does not depend on

Neoclassicists emphasize that the uncertainty of the duration of deviations and lags predetermines the inefficiency and even the destabilizing nature of discretionary economic policy. Therefore, neoclassical theory believes that automatic politics is more preferable. Since the decisive factor in economic activity and the price level, according to the neoclassicists, is the money supply, insofar as they prefer automatic monetary policy, the essence of which is to implement a monetary targeting policy (determination of target indicators of monetary aggregates M1 or M2) based on the monetary rule.

The value (cost) of goods according to Smith - Ricardo - Marx is created by labor, respectively, all types of income (interest, rent, profit, wages) are also created by labor, i.e. one factor - the work of neoclassicists, however, argue that all these factors participate in the creation of income. In this regard, neoclassicists pay great attention to the study of the market for factors of production. Accordingly, the neoclassical labor market is interpreted as a market of only one factor of production, labor is a product of this market, an object of sale. This position of the neoclassical theory of the labor market is developed in all textbooks on Economics.

Secondly, neo-institutional economic theory proceeds from the inviolability of the basic postulates of neoclassical theory, as such, recognizing the so-called "hard core" of neoclassicism, which contains the following key provisions a) the stability and internal nature of individual and household preferences b) individuals always make rational consumer choices

The problem of risk and uncertainty in economic theory has long been underestimated. So, the neoclassicists of the XX century. studied the issues of resource allocation in a market economy, ignoring risk and uncertainty factors, considering them external. Some of the founders of the neoclassical theory of markets and resource allocation treated with a fair amount of skepticism

We mentioned and briefly highlighted the essence of the marginal utility principle, since it (along with others) was the basis of neoclassical theory, which provides for the need to take into account both production costs and the magnitude of the utility of goods produced. The neoclassicists took the path of harmonizing two seemingly incompatible theories - the labor theory of D. Ricardo and the theory of marginal utility of E. Böhm-Bawerk. As mentioned above, this harmonization of the two concepts was carried out by A. Marshall, who proceeded from the fact that D. Ricardo and E. Böhm-Bawerk practically focused their attention on different aspects of the same process, the value formation process. Marshall rethought, reworked the theory of labor value (the objective side, the action of objective factors) and the theory of marginal utility (the action of subjective factors) into the theory of mutual relations of supply and demand.

The problem of economic man received further development in the theories of the neoclassical direction, in particular, in the works of representatives of the Austrian school. However, here we find a narrowing of the problem, since economic man now appears only as an agent of the market, exercising a free choice of options for his economic behavior in relation to limited resources. There is a reduction of economic man to a "seller - buyer", and these latter (implicitly, sometimes explicitly) - to the consumer. From the economic man in the neoclassical theory, only the premise of the economic freedom of the individual remains, which, in turn, is laid in the foundation of economic theory as the principle of methodological individualism (I. Schumpeter).

On the opposition of the free individual and the elements of the market. Neoclassical economic theory is the only one of all theoretical schools that openly puts "at the forefront" of its concept of a free individual who makes an economic choice. Although we have already emphasized that the free individual is only one side of the problem of the subject of economic activity in neoclassical theory. The other side is the market mechanism, which ensures the optimality of individual economic decisions. The opposition of the free individual and the spontaneous market mechanism is more characteristic of the "late" neoclassicists. For example, representatives of the neo-Austrian economic school F. Hayek and L. von Mises are directly concerned with this contradiction, moreover, specifically formulated. L. von Mises, complains that in economic theory there is a "rejection of the principle of methodological

Around the last conclusion, a broad discussion unfolded, called in the literature of the 1960s. "Cambridge discussion about capital", since the main opponents were the supporters of Sraffa from the University of Cambridge (Great Britain) and the apologists of the "neoclassical" theory, who united around Paul Samuelson in Cambridge (USA). Neoclassicists were forced to admit that the concept of marginal returns is applicable only to an economy in which only one good is produced, which can be used both as a consumer good and as a capital good. Then, by definition, the concept of the amount of capital becomes meaningful again. The world of one good is, according to Samuelson, "allegory", since for it the properties inherent in the real world can be proved, for which they are unprovable due to the complexity of the latter.

The scientific community has been looking for explanations for the origins and prerequisites of highly efficient economic development for many decades. Neoclassical theory, according to North, currently cannot give a satisfactory explanation for this phenomenon, since it does not reveal the problem of mutual conditioning of institutional changes and economic growth. She, this theory, was unable to identify and interpret differences in the functioning of societies and economies, in the use of market mechanisms, both at a single moment in time and over a certain period. Douglas North's approach to economic growth goes far beyond the factors taken into account by neoclassical economists; he considers technology, population, ideology, politics, and institutions. A new understanding of the long-term successes and crises of societies is being created.

Keynes's theory and the budgetary policy based on it gained immense popularity in subsequent years. Most economists could call themselves Keynesians and statesmen working in the field of macroeconomic problems. It should be noted that the General Theory ... of Keynes is not written clearly and rigorously enough, so it is not always clear what exactly the author had in mind. That's why further development Keynesian theory went according to different directions. The most influential of these saw Keynesianism as an important but still addition to neoclassical theory, which explains the possible instability of the economy by inflexible wage rates and a liquidity trap. This direction was called neoclassical synthesis (meaning the synthesis of neoclassics and Keynesianism). An important role here was played by the English economist John Richard Hicks (1904-89), who built the so-called ISLM model, and the American Paul Samuelson (Samuelson, born in 1915). Other Keynesians (R. Klauer, A. Leyonhufvud, and others) believed that Keynes's teaching was distorted in the neoclassical synthesis. In their opinion, in principle, it cannot be synthesized with neoclassical theory, since it comes from a situation of uncertainty and disequilibrium, the expectations of entrepreneurs play a large role in it, and neoclassicism, on the contrary, assumes complete information and equilibrium.

Most famous representatives neoclassical theory Alfred Marshall (Great Britain), Leon Walras (Switzerland), John Bates Clark (USA), Knut Wicksell (Sweden), then American economists Paul Samuelson (Samuelson), Kenneth Arrow, Gary Becker and others. most modern economists in the world. All microeconomics courses taught at universities and schools are written on the basis of neoclassical theory. The main prerequisites from which the neoclassical theory proceeds can be called the prerequisites for the rationality of man and the equilibrium of the world. The rationality of a person means that in his activity he seeks to achieve the maximum value of a certain function, which is commonly called the target function. Such a function can be utility for the consumer or profit for the firm. The principle of objective function maximization made it possible to apply mathematical tools of analysis to economic problems, because mathematicians are good at solving problems to find the maximum of functions.

In general, during the 20th century, the dominant position of the so-called mainstream developed in economic theory. This term is usually called neoclassical theory, in its modern form, which is most clearly presented in foreign standard textbooks and a number of leading theoretical journals on economic theory. However, it should be noted that the mainstream is not limited to the fundamental provisions of neoclassicism. The most important feature mainstream consists in its ability to absorb into itself, to make its integral part postulates of Keynesianism, neo-Keynesianism, neo-institutionalism, etc. that have stood the test of time. It is enough to compare the 5th edition of the well-known textbook by P. Samuelson

Late 1950s was marked by a study of the problems of economic growth by neoclassical economists, whose main representatives are J. Hicks, J. E. Mead (Great Britain), R. Solow, M. Brown (USA) and others. The starting point of their research was that demand automatically is equal to supply in the process of economic growth, the leading role is played by the supply of economic resources, as well as the efficiency of their use; the main technological coefficients are influenced by the prices of production factors and the nature of technical progress. The main prerequisite for the emergence of the neoclassical theory of economic growth was the idea of ​​the existence of free competition and the prices of production factors, set at the level of their marginal products, which allegedly guarantees the stability of economic equilibrium. Based on these premises, neoclassical economists created their own version of the economic growth model. This model was based on the Cobb-Douglas production function. Based on this and other more complex production functions, the neoclassicists derived a system of indicators that characterize the relationship between costs and output (i.e., resource elasticity coefficients of output), between costs as such (i.e., the marginal rate and elasticity of resource substitution ) they also include a system of economic impact of quantitative characteristics of technical progress of neutral and non-neutral technical progress, which affects the ratio of the efficiency of production factors materialized, which is embodied in the means of production, and non-materialized, which is not embodied in the means of production. Empirical evaluation of the parameters of production functions is an important tool for analyzing the quantitative relationships that determine the potential output.

But it seems that the emphasis on entrepreneurship, as a function in a market economy, aims not so much to once again confirm the principle of methodological individualism, but to reveal what makes up a spontaneous order. It is the latter that is given primacy as a coordinator and regulator of the distribution of resources and their more efficient use. Here, among the neo-Austrians, there is a contradiction between the two principles inherited from the neoclassics between methodological individualism, Hayek's strengthened position that economic decisions are made by people, but not firms or collectives, on the one hand, and the spontaneous market order, - with another. If in neoclassical theory, market competition, in the event of reaching a general equilibrium, provides all participants with maximum utility (producers - profitability), then spontaneous market order provides the most - "this is an improvement in someone's chances of success, although it is not known whose"6. In the classic version of methodological individualism, which was formulated by Smith in his famous passage about the butcher and the baker,

AT modern theories the terms and concepts of the original theories that made up the neoclassic are often used through negation (the principle of limited rationality, group motivation, etc.). And from this point of view, without knowing the language of neoclassical theory, modern Western theories are simply impossible to read; understand. This applies already to the first radical anti-neoclassical book - the work of J. Keynes General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money. Of course, the most important ideas of Keynes can be translated into another language, such as Marxist, and made clear to those who have not studied neoclassical studies. But Keynes's work is written in the language of neoclassics, and such a translation will not be able to open the way to the scientific space - the space of Keynesianism and anti-Keynesianism.

What would it mean for writing (and thus reading) economic history and history in general to include explicitly institutional analysis in it Writing history is writing a coherent account of how certain aspects of human existence have changed over time. Such an exposition exists only in the human mind. We do not recreate the past, we only compose a summary of events that took place in the past. For this presentation to be good, true story, it must be consistent and logical and not go beyond the evidence we have and the theory we have. The short answer to the question we asked at the very beginning of the chapter is that including institutions in history produces a much better narrative than without institutions. "Cliometric" (descriptive) economic history actually "revolves" around institutions, and if the most experienced specialists take up the presentation, then it (history) appears before us as a continuum and sequence of institutional changes, i.e. in evolutionary form. But because economic history is based on an unstructured set of pieces and fragments of theory and statistics, it is unable to produce generalizations or analyzes that would go beyond the specific historical plot. The contribution of the cliometric approach lies in the application to history of a codified body of theoretical ideas—neoclassical theory—as well as in the application of highly developed quantitative methods to develop and test historical models. However, we have already paid a high price for the uncritical acceptance of neoclassical theory. Although the main contribution of neoclassical economic history was the systematic application of price theory, the focus of neoclassical theory is the problem of allocation of resources at any given time. This is incredibly shackling for historians, for whom the main issue is to explain the course of change over time. Moreover, the neoclassical view of the allocation of resources as a process that

Scientific revolution of the 1930s. did not lead to the complete elimination of neoclassicism. Yes and. J. M. Keynes himself did not suggest this, since he wrote that under conditions of full employment, when goods, services and other resources regain their scarcity property, the main task of neoclassical theory is to find the optimal option for using scarce resources based on the laws of marginalism (marginal utility -and performance) - becomes relevant again. Already at the end of the period of interest to us, the English economist J. Hicks in the well-known article by Keynes and the classics of the proposed interpretation (1939) put forward a variant of compromise. Keynesian macroanalysis proposes methods of state regulation of the economy in order to eliminate mass unemployment and achieve full employment of resources upon reaching the specified microeconomic result. problems (pricing, neoclassical theory

With the ideas of marginalism.

The main work of A. Marshall is the six books « Principles of economics» - published in 1890 and subsequently constantly supplemented and revised by him in eight editions published during his lifetime.

From the point of view of the continuity of ideas classics", A. Marshall studied the economic activity of people from the standpoint of "pure" economic theory and the ideal business model, possible thanks to " perfect competition". But having come to the idea of ​​equilibrium of the economy through new marginal principles, he characterized it only as “ private" situation”, i.e. at the level of firm, industry (microeconomics). This approach became decisive both for the Cambridge school he created and for most of the neoclassicists of the late 19th - first third of the 20th centuries.

The term " economics» Marshall introduced in the very first chapter of his book « Political Economy», or economics ( economics), is engaged in the study of normal life human society; it studies that sphere of individual and social action which is most closely connected with the creation of the material foundations of well-being.

Marshall acknowledges that in the economy of his day, " the distribution of the national dividend is poor". But if we allow equal distribution of national income he writes, ... the incomes of the masses - although they will, of course, increase significantly at a time due to the elimination of all inequalities - and will not rise even temporarily to the level predicted by the socialist expectations of a golden age.
Wealth inequality... a serious flaw in our economic system. Any reduction in it, achieved by means that do not undermine the motives of free initiative ... would, apparently, be a clear social achievement.».

The central place in Marshall's studies is occupied by the problem of free pricing in the market, which he characterizes as a single organism of an equilibrium economy, consisting of mobile and informed about each other economic entities. He considers the market price as the result of the intersection of the demand price, determined by marginal utility, and the supply price, determined by marginal cost.

Henry Sedgwick (1838-1900) in his treatise « The principle of political economy» argued that private and social benefits do not coincide, that free competition ensures the efficient production of wealth, but does not give it a fair distribution. System " natural freedom» gives rise to conflicts between private and public interests. The conflict also arises within the public interest: between the benefit of the current moment and the interests of future generations.

Arthur Pigou (1877-1959). Main labor « Welfare economics». At the center of his theory is the concept of a national dividend (income). He considered the national dividend an indicator not only of the efficiency of social production, but also of a measure of social welfare. Pigou set the task - to find out the relationship between the economic interests of society and the individual in the aspect of distribution problems, using the concept of " marginal net product».

The key concept of Pigou's concept is the divergence (gap) between private benefits and costs and public benefits and costs. An example is a factory with a smoking chimney. The factory uses air (a public good) and imposes external costs on others. Pigou considered the system of taxes and subsidies to be a means of influence.

Achieving the maximum national dividend is possible through the action of 2 complementary forces - private interest and state intervention, expressing the interests of society.

The neoclassical concept of equilibrium in conditions of unemployment is called the Pigou effect. This effect shows the effect of assets on consumption and depends on the part of the money supply that reflects the government's net debt. Therefore, the Pigou effect is based on " foreign money" (gold, paper money, government bonds) as opposed to " domestic money» (checkable deposits), for which falling prices and wages do not generate a net aggregate effect. Therefore, when prices and wages fall, the supply ratio " external The ratio of liquid wealth to national income rises until the desire to save saturates, which in turn stimulates consumption.

Pigou also made adjustments to I. Fisher's money research methodology, proposing to take into account the motives of economic entities at the macro level, which determine them " propensity for liquidity"- the desire to put aside part of the money in the stock in the form of bank deposits and securities.

J.B. Clark's contribution to neoclassical economics

John Bates Clark (1847-1938) - founder of the American school of marginalism, who made a significant contribution to the formation of neoclassical economic theory of the late 19th century.

His most significant work « philosophy of wealth» (1886) and « Wealth distribution» (1899), in which he managed to delve into the most popular margin ideas at that time and identify extraordinary provisions:

• the novelty of the methodology within the framework of the advanced doctrine of the three natural divisions (departments) of economic science. The first covers the universal phenomena of wealth. The second includes socio-economic statics and talks about what happens next with wealth. The third section includes socio-economic dynamics and talks about what happens to the wealth and well-being of society, provided that society changes the form and methods of activity;
• substantiated on microeconomic analysis, the law of marginal productivity of factors of production.

« Distribution of public income" is governed by public law, which " with completely free competition can provide each factor of production with the amount of wealth it creates.

« Wealth"are quantitatively limited sources of material human well-being.

« Each factor of production"has in the social product the share of wealth that it produces.

The decomposition of the total income of society into different kinds income (wages, interest and profits) is directly and entirely " subject of economic science". The named types of income are obtained accordingly “ for doing work», « for the provision of capital" and " for coordinating wages and interest».

When determining income with common sense" neither of " classes of people, employed in production, will not be " have claims against each other».

In the economic sense, the production of a product is not completed until the representatives of the trade have brought it to the buyer and the sale has taken place, which is " final act of social production».

Imaginary static social production is inherent in the invariable nature of operations associated with the constant release of the same types of goods with the same technological processes, types of tools and materials that do not allow either to increase or decrease the amount of wealth delivered by production. In a state of social-static production, the land is cultivated with the same tools and the same type of crop is obtained, and in factories they work with the same machines and materials, i.e. nothing changes in the mode of production of wealth, or, in other words, the productive organism keeps its form unchanged.

So, in a state of statics, one can state movement as if in a closed system, which predetermines the equilibrium and stability of the economy.

General views changes that form dynamic conditions that destabilize the economy:

1. increase in population;
2. capital growth;
3. improving production methods;
4. shape changing industrial enterprises;
5. the survival of more productive enterprises instead of the elimination of less productive ones.

Clark sets out the assumption that people even before the end of the 20th century. will be aware of the consequences to which the factors of the dynamic state of society lead, and this will happen due to " pure theory of economic dynamics”, allowing a qualitative analysis of the phenomena of variability and transferring the theory to a new plane, expanding the subject of political economy many times over.

Clark operates in categories such as " limit worker», « limiting nature of work», « marginal utility», « ultimate utility», « ultimate performance", and others. He fully accepts the principle of the priority of microeconomic analysis, arguing, in particular, that " Robinson's life was introduced into economic research, not because it is important in itself, but because the principles that govern the economy of the isolated individual continue to govern the economy of the modern state.».

Clark's main merit is the development of the concept of income distribution based on the principles of marginal analysis of the prices of factors of production, which in the economic literature is called Clark's law of marginal productivity.

According to the scientist, this law takes place in conditions of free (perfect) competition, when the mobility of all economic entities contributes to the achievement of the equilibrium parameters of the economy.

Clark decided to focus on the principle of diminishing marginal productivity of homogeneous, i.e. having the same efficiency, factors of production. This means that with a constant capital-labor ratio, the marginal productivity of labor will begin to decline with each newly recruited worker, and, conversely, with a constant number of employees, the marginal productivity of labor can only be higher due to an increased capital-labor ratio.

Having built the development of his theory of marginal productivity at the micro level and mainly on the example of a freely functioning competitive enterprise, Clark claims the existence of a certain “ zones of indifference" or " limit sphere”, which in the field of operation of each enterprise is considered controlled.

Basically, from law» Clark's marginal productivity, the depressing conclusion is that the price of a factor of production is due to its relative scarcity. This, in particular, suggests that fair wages» always corresponds to the marginal productivity of labor, and the latter may be relatively lower than another more productive factor, i.e. capital.

The essence of " law»Clark comes down to the following: a factor of production - labor or capital - can be incremented until the value of the product produced by this factor equals its price (for example, the number of employees in an enterprise can only be increased up to a certain limit, i.e. until this factor enters into " zone of indifference»).

The action of this law” in economic practice suggests that the incentive to increase the factor of production exhausts itself when the price of this factor begins to exceed the possible income of the entrepreneur.

T. A. Frolova. - History of economic doctrines: lecture notes. - Taganrog: TRTU, 2004

The neoclassicists adopted from the classics the adherence to the principles of economic liberalism and the desire to stick to pure theory without subjectivist, psychological and other non-economic layers.

Alfred Marshall(1842-1924) is the most synthetic figure in the entire history of economic thought. In his economic theory, the achievements of classical economics of science (Smith, Ricardo and Mill) and the marginalist revolution (from Menger to Walras) are organically combined. His main work "Principles of Economics" written in 1890.

Marshall proposed to replace the term "political economy" with "economics" (literally - "economic theory"). In his opinion, this term more accurately reflects the subject of research; "economics" has reason to claim the name exact science; economic life must be considered outside of political influences, outside of government intervention. Strictly speaking, accurate translation the names of Marshall's main work are "Principles of Economics", and not "Principles of Political Economy", as given in the Russian translation.

The central place in the studies of A. Marshall is occupied by the problem free pricing on the market. He considers the market price as the result of the intersection of the demand price, determined by marginal utility, and the supply price, determined by marginal cost.

Marshall's merit is to identify the functional dependence of such factors as price, demand and supply. He showed that with a decrease in price, demand increases, and with an increase in price, it decreases, and that, in turn, with a decrease in price, supply decreases, and with an increase in price, it increases. Stable, or equilibrium, A. Marshall considered such a price, which is set at the equilibrium point of supply and demand (on the chart, the point of intersection of the supply and demand curves is commonly called the "Marshall's cross").

Marshall introduced the concept elasticity of demand. He characterizes the elasticity of demand as an indicator of the dependence of the volume of demand on price changes. He revealed a different degree of elasticity of demand for goods, depending on the structure of consumption, income level and other factors, showed that the lowest elasticity of demand is inherent in essential goods.

Research in the framework of the theory of "marginal production costs" allowed A. Marshall to identify patterns of change average cost of production with an increase in production volumes at the enterprise. He notes that, as a rule, a large-scale production in a competitive economy provides an enterprise with a reduction in the price of marketable products and, accordingly, an advantage over competitors (thanks to the ever-increasing savings from the ability to work and from the use of specialized machines and all kinds of equipment) and that the main benefit from such savings extracts all the same society.

Marshall derives two economic laws: increasing returns and constant returns. In accordance with the first, an increase in the volume of labor and capital inputs leads to an improvement in the organization of production, which increases the efficiency of the use of labor and capital and gives a higher return. According to the second law, an increase in the volume of labor and other costs leads to a proportional increase in the volume of output.

According to A. Marshall, in a competitive environment, unit costs with the enlargement of production either decrease or develop in parallel, but just do not outpace the growth rate of output. Subsequently, on the basis of these judgments, microeconomic theory put forward more reliable methodological solutions to the problem of optimizing production and the size of enterprises. Dividing production costs into permanent and variables, A. Marshall showed that in the long run, fixed costs become variable. In his opinion, the main motive forcing the firm to leave the market is the excess of its costs over the market price.

Interest on capital, according to Marshall, manifests itself as a "reward" to those who, having material resources, expect future satisfaction from them, as well as wages, in his opinion, should be considered a reward for work. Marshall does not agree that the value of a thing depends on the amount of labor spent on its manufacture. If this is so, the scientist argues, the services provided by capital are a free good and therefore do not need remuneration as an incentive for its further functioning.

John Bates Clark(1847-1938) is the leader of the American marginalism, a neoclassical trend that was formed at the end of the last century. In 1899 his main work was published "Wealth Distribution", in which he writes that society is burdened with the accusation that it exploits labor. Clark sets himself the task of deflecting this charge and proving that there are no contradictions in American society and that public income is fairly distributed.

Clark proceeded from the inviolability of the principle of private property. Instead of the communist slogan "from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs", he formulated the thesis "To each factor - a certain share in the product and to each - an appropriate reward - this is the natural law of distribution." By "each" Clarke meant the theory of the three factors of production: labor, land, and capital.

He saw the whole problem in proving that each factor of production receives its corresponding "share" of the national income, i.e. the share that they created. This will prove that capitalist society is fundamentally just.

Clark introduces economic theory into the field of statics, i.e. in such a state of society, which is characterized by balance and peace, lack of development. According to Clark, it is in this state that it is necessary to investigate "the imputation to each factor of production of an appropriate share." This approach is applied to the treatment of wages, interest and rent. According to Clarke, wages are determined "marginal productivity" workers. Clark's line of reasoning is as follows. With the same amount of capital and the same level of technology, an increase in the number of workers employed in the enterprise will lead to a drop in the productivity of each newly hired worker.

The entrepreneur can increase the number of workers only until the "zone of indifference" comes, i.e. when the last of the employed workers cannot ensure the production of even such a quantity of products that he entirely appropriates for himself. The labor productivity of a worker belonging to the "zone of indifference" is called the "marginal productivity of labor."

Further increase the number of workers in the enterprise beyond the "zone of indifference", "marginal labor productivity" will cause a loss to capital as a factor of production. From here

Clarke concluded that wages depend, firstly, on labor productivity, and secondly, on the level of employment of workers, the more workers are employed, the lower labor productivity will be and the lower wages should be.

Clark concludes that the stability of the social organism depends mainly on whether the amount received by the workers, regardless of its size, is equal to what they produce. If they create a small amount of wealth and receive it in full, there is no need for them to strive for a social revolution.

Similar information.

100 r first order bonus

Select the type of work Degree work Coursework Abstract Master's thesis Report on practice Article Report Review Test Monograph Problem solving Business plan Answering questions Creative work Essay Drawing Compositions Translation Presentations Typing Other Increasing the uniqueness of the text Candidate's thesis Laboratory work On-line help

Ask for a price

The neoclassical direction was formed in the last third of the CIC century as a result of the marginalist revolution. Until that time, in the economy, not marginal, but average values ​​were studied: here main category- "the marginal utility of the good", i.e. utility of the last unit of the good. It is she who underlies the price of the good. The direction was formed through the formation and development of four neoclassical schools with their subsequent merger.

1. Austrian school(Karl Menger, Friedrich von Wieser, Eugen von Böhm-Bawerk).

Representatives of the University of Vienna believed that basis of the economy– individual economy, micro level. It is there that the subjective evaluation of the good takes place; then, when entering the market, objective assessments appear, the price is formed. It is based not on labor, but on the marginal utility of a good. Class interests, social plaque in the economy they (representatives) are not interested. They rule here two forces: demand and sentence that form the market price. Hence the conclusion about the dangers of the state in the economy is logical.

2. School of Lausanne(Leon Walras, Vilfredo Pareto).

Walras introduced formulas, graphs, higher mathematics into economic theory. From it begin to solve the problem of minimum and maximum, economic balance and economic efficiency. Walras is the author of the circulation of goods and resources. The model he proposed has migrated to all modern textbooks in economic theory. He introduced the concept "power utility", laid the theory of welfare.

"Pareto Optimum"- if, as a result of the transaction, the economic situation of any of its participants worsened, the optimal state has already been reached.

3. Cambridge School(Alfred Marshal, Arthur Pigou).

Novelty in the teachings of Marshall:

In the methodology before him, the main science was political economy with an emphasis on class positions. He has an economic theory, economics, through market forces: demand, supply, market equilibrium, all economic categories are considered.

Rejection of the causal method in favor of the functional method. A striking example of the first method is Marx's consideration of the commodity:

Marshal has a functional dependence of demand on price: with an increase in price, demand decreases. Demand depends on supply, etc.

The functional approach is an even functional dependence. Marshal believed that it was not necessary to look for the cause of prices and income. The price is determined by the intersection of supply and demand curves.

Introduced the concept of economic equilibrium, but considered it at the micro level.

Introduced the concept of time in the economy (considered the price of an instantaneous, short, medium, long period).

At present, the concepts of the price of a short and long period have been preserved. Short term price- the equilibrium price, when supply does not have time to respond to changes in demand. Long run price-supply changes with demand.

Following Smith, he adhered to the idea of ​​non-intervention of the state in the economy. The market economy will cope with everything on its own, the state must deal with foreign trade, currency, do not touch the national market.

Introduced the concept of elasticity in the economy (the sensitivity of some indicators depending on changes in others).

4. American school(John Bates Clark - the author of the theory of marginal productivity of production factors).

Representatives of the school were also engaged in marginal utility, making economic forecasts for the main volumes of macroeconomic indicators.

All four schools had a lot in common, without being familiar with each other, they came to the same conclusions. In the end, they merged into a single neoclassical direction led by Alfred Marshal. This direction dominated economic theory from the 70s of the CIC century until October 26, 1929. Theory becomes a science when Alfred Marshal's book "The Principle of Political Economy" took shape in a textbook.

Reasons for the long dominance of this trend in economic theory:

• The formation of the middle class (a mass consumer appeared, which forms the market price - ⅔ of the country's population).
• This direction creates an apparatus for determining economic efficiency.
• The neoclassical direction created the foundations of modern microeconomics.

By October 26, 1929, first theoretically, and then practically neoclassical does not answer the following questions:

o Why do crises like the Great Depression occur?

o How to get out of the Great Depression?

o What should be done to prevent similar disasters in the future?

Neoclassical theory (school)(English neoclassical economics) - a direction of economic thought that reflects the ideas of classical political economy (see) and their further evolution and development within the framework of the marginalist school (see), neoliberal, monetary (see) and other concepts of modern conservatism.

The concept of neoclassical theory first appeared in late XIX in. in relation to representatives of marginalism of the second wave. The neoclassical school is characterized by support for the idea of ​​economic liberalism, which consists in minimal state intervention in the market system of free competition.

Representatives of the neoclassical school (J.B. Clark, F.I. Edgeworth, I. Fisher, W. Jevons, K. Menger, I. Tyunen, A. Marshall, V. Pareto, L. Walras, K. Wicksell) consider the market system as self-regulating, self-tuning and the most cost-effective of all known to mankind. Within the framework of the ideas of the neoclassical school, L. Walras developed a model of competitive equilibrium.

Neoclassical theory of economics, neoclassicism - emerged at the end of the 19th century. course of economic thought, which can be considered the beginning of modern economic science. It produced the so-called marginalist revolution in the classical economy of the past century, which was represented by such names as A. Smith, D. Ricardo, J. Mill, K. Marx and others.

Marginal revolution means the following: "Neoclassics" developed the tools of the marginal analysis of the economy, primarily the concept of marginal utility, almost simultaneously discovered by W. Jevons, C. Menger and L. Walras, as well as marginal productivity, which was also used by some representatives of classical economics, for example, I. Tyunen. Among the largest representatives of neoclassicism, in addition to those named, are J. Clark, F. Edgeworth, I. Fisher, A. Marshall, V. Pareto, K. Wicksell. They emphasized the importance of the scarcity of goods for determining their price, laid general idea about the essence of the optimal distribution of (given) resources. At the same time, they proceeded from the theorems of limit analysis, defining the conditions for the optimal choice of goods, the optimal structure of production, the optimal intensity of the use of factors, the optimal moment in time (interest rate). All these concepts are summarized in the main criterion: the subjective and objective rates of substitution between any two goods (products or resources) must be equal for all households and all production units, respectively, and these subjective and objective ratios must be equal to each other. In addition to these basic conditions, second-order conditions were studied - the law of diminishing returns, as well as the ranking system of individual utilities, etc.

Apparently, the main achievement of this school is the model of competitive equilibrium developed by Walras. However, in general, the neoclassical theory of economics is characterized by a microeconomic approach to economic phenomena, in contrast to the theory of which the macroeconomic approach dominates.

Neoclassicists laid the foundation for later economic concepts such as the theory of welfare economics, the theory of economic growth. These concepts are sometimes referred to as the "modern neoclassical school". A number of recent economists have also tried to combine some of the provisions of classical theory, neoclassicism and Keynesianism - this trend has been called neoclassical synthesis.

The ideas of the neoclassical theory of economics were most fully outlined in A. Marshall's Principles of Economic Theory, which “... should be recognized as one of the most durable and viable books in the history of economic science: this is the only treatise of the 19th century. on Economics, which is still sold by the hundreds every year, and which can still be read with great profit by the modern reader.