Obálkyknih.cz - Jihočeská vědecká knihovna v Českých Budějovicích

oprava existující anotace, přidání nové anotace

Název:		Capital and its structure
Autor:		Lachmann, Ludwig M.
Rok vydání:		1978
Identifikátory:		9780836207408

Upravte stávající anotaci nebo vložte anotaci novou.
Anotace:	Table of Contents: Chapter I: The Order of CapitalChapter II: On ExpectationsChapter III: Process Analysis and Capital TheoryChapter IV: The Meaning of Capital StructureChapter V: Capital Structure and Economic ProgressChapter VI: Capital Structure and Asset StructureChapter VII: Capital In the Trade Cycle a selection from: CHAPTER I - THE ORDER OF CAPITAL The realm of economics consists of many provinces between which, in the course of time, a fairly high degree of interregional division of labour has evolved. Naturally, development in some of these regions has been faster than in others. There are some -backward areas-, and a few of them actually appear to merit description as -distressed areas-. None seems to have a better claim to this unenviable status than the Theory of Capital. In fact it would hardly be an exaggeration to say that at the present time a systematic theory of capital scarcely exists. Considering the degree of division of labour just mentioned this surely is an astonishing state of affairs. There can hardly be a field of economic thought, pure or applied, in which the word -capital- is not more or less constantly employed. We hear of a world-wide capital shortage. In discussions on the convertibility of currencies we are asked to distinguish between -current- and capital transactions. And it is clear that the -economic integration of Western Europe- requires that some at least of the industrial resources of these countries be regrouped and change their form; in other words, that it entails a modification of Europe's capital structure. Yet, in the Theory of Capital the present state of affairs is as we have described it. The product imported and used by the other economic disciplines is not a standardized product. The word -capital-, as used by economists, has no clear and unambiguous meaning. Sometimes the word denotes the material resources of production, sometimes their money value. Sometimes it means money sums available for loan or the purchase of assets. While to some economists -capital- has come to mean nothing but the present value of future income streams. The conclusion suggests itself that no progress made in the theory of capital could fail to pay handsome dividends in the form of -external economics- to be reaped by all those who have to work with the notion of capital. The root of the trouble is well known: capital resources are heterogeneous. Capital, as distinct from labour and land, lacks a -natural- unit of measurement. While we may add head to head (even woman's head to man's head) and acre to acre (possibly weighted by an index of fertility) we cannot add beer barrels to blast furnaces nor trucks to yards of telephone wire. Yet, the economist cannot do his work properly without a generic concept of capital. Where he has to deal with quantitative change he needs a common denominator. Almost inevitably he follows the business man in adopting money value as his standard of measurement of capital change. This means that whenever relative money values change, we lose our common denominator.
	Souhlasím s využitím anotace pro potřeby projektu obálkyknih.cz. Obsah neporušuje autorská práva.(povinné)