5 Factors Of Production

[R_P_A_S]

So today in class we were talking about the American System and Supply and Demand

an economic expert was quoted saying "The U.S. allows other countries the opportunity to grow, by creating free markets and letting them import their products into the U.S."

He also listed the 5 FACTORS OF PRODUCTION.

1. LABOR(in a free market you get to choose who to work for)
2. CAPITAL
3. ENTREPRENEURS
4. PHSYICAL RESOURCES(not sure what this means)
5. INFORMATION RESOURCES(technology and such)

This was the discussion in my classroom today. :rolleyes:

[Whitten]

4. PHSYICAL RESOURCES(not sure what this means)

He means things such as: metals, fuel etc

[Janus]

PHSYICAL RESOURCES
The actual resources taken from the Earth or used to make a product. For example: coal or iron.

[R_P_A_S]

oooh ok. got it. i think is funny how they stressed and made it sound cool that you get to choose who you work for in a free market. LOL

[Comrade-Z]

Couldn't #4 and #5 be grouped in with #2? And by #3, don't they mean "people who have #2 and are willing to use it"? So coudn't the functions of #3 be taken over by #1, assuming #1 has the wherewithal to forcibly acquire #2 from #3?

[Anti-Red]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2006, 08:29 PM
So today in class we were talking about the American System and Supply and Demand

an economic expert was quoted saying "The U.S. allows other countries the opportunity to grow, by creating free markets and letting them import their products into the U.S."

He also listed the 5 FACTORS OF PRODUCTION.

1. LABOR(in a free market you get to choose who to work for)
2. CAPITAL
3. ENTREPRENEURS
4. PHSYICAL RESOURCES(not sure what this means)
5. INFORMATION RESOURCES(technology and such)

This was the discussion in my classroom today. :rolleyes:
Why do you go to school in the middle of the summer?

[R_P_A_S]

Originally posted by Anti-Red+Jul 15 2006, 03:08 AM--> (Anti-Red @ Jul 15 2006, 03:08 AM)
[email protected] 14 2006, 08:29 PM
So today in class we were talking about the American System and Supply and Demand

an economic expert was quoted saying "The U.S. allows other countries the opportunity to grow, by creating free markets and letting them import their products into the U.S."

He also listed the 5 FACTORS OF PRODUCTION.

1. LABOR(in a free market you get to choose who to work for)
2. CAPITAL
3. ENTREPRENEURS
4. PHSYICAL RESOURCES(not sure what this means)
5. INFORMATION RESOURCES(technology and such)

This was the discussion in my classroom today. :rolleyes:
Why do you go to school in the middle of the summer? [/b]
oh its for summer courses. so you can catch up on credits. since i work full time is hard for me to go to school full time.

[BobKKKindle$]

I have been taught traditional British Economics, and as such The Factors of production are Land (Raw materials) Labour (Those Who Sell their Labour as a commodity, ranging from assembly line workers to senior managers) Enterprise (Those who Own and apparently Organise the Factors of Production) and Capital (The Means of production and Technichal Apparatus)

Please inform your sorry excuse for a teacher that not only does the US impose some of the World's most stringent Agricultural quotas and tarrifs on Foreign agrcultural products, it also imposes numerous restrictions on other commodities, most notably as of late Chinese textiles. So America is in fact only a supporter of free trade when it is in its interests. On the Flip side, American Multinationals are imposed a new series of Class relations on LEDCs. MNCs own and control the means of production (In this context, they have control of Foreign Direct Investement) and so gain the benefits of the labour and raw materials of the LEDCs whilst paying LEDC governemnts and workers less than the full value of their labour/materials - surplus value on an international level.

[theraven]

I have been taught traditional British Economics, and as such The Factors of production are Land (Raw materials) Labour (Those Who Sell their Labour as a commodity, ranging from assembly line workers to senior managers) Enterprise (Those who Own and apparently Organise the Factors of Production) and Capital (The Means of production and Technichal Apparatus)

so you change a few words eh


Please inform your sorry excuse for a teacher that not only does the US impose some of the World's most stringent Agricultural quotas and tarrifs on Foreign agrcultural products, it also imposes numerous restrictions on other commodities, most notably as of late Chinese textiles. So America is in fact only a supporter of free trade when it is in its interests. On the Flip side, American Multinationals are imposed a new series of Class relations on LEDCs. MNCs own and control the means of production (In this context, they have control of Foreign Direct Investement) and so gain the benefits of the labour and raw materials of the LEDCs whilst paying LEDC governemnts and workers less than the full value of their labour/materials - surplus value on an international level.

1) surplus value is bogues because as illusrated above there are more thne just labor to pay for and labor.

2) ameriican farms have long gotten protection fro politicalr easons

[BobKKKindle$]

so you change a few words eh

Let us not get into a petty disuccsion over Linguistic differences, but since the pioneer of modern Economic Analysis (Adam Smith) and the Foremost Economists of the 20th Century (Maynard Keynes) were born and educated in Britain, it makes sense to use the Same terminology as they did when engaging in economic discussion so that one can understand references in Economic Texts.


surplus value is bogues because as illusrated above there are more thne just labor to pay for and labor

THis has been explained before, but let me illustrate it clearly. Even in Industries where production is primarily labour based and Capital inputs are very low (so your argument does not apply) workers are still payed far less (< than 1%) than the market price of the good. A Key example of this is Nike, who, as a brand label, charge high prices for their commodities, yet pay some of the lowest wages out of all mutinational corporations.


2) ameriican farms have long gotten protection fro politicalr easons

So you agree that his teacher is misguiding the students by failing to inform them off the reality of the US&#39; Foreign Exchange Mechanisms.

[theraven]

Let us not get into a petty disuccsion over Linguistic differences, but since the pioneer of modern Economic Analysis (Adam Smith) and the Foremost Economists of the 20th Century (Maynard Keynes) were born and educated in Britain, it makes sense to use the Same terminology as they did when engaging in economic discussion so that one can understand references in Economic Texts.

sure, if we are refering to the economic texts that would make sense. but when explainign them to american studetns it makes sesne to refer to them in colliquial american language.



THis has been explained before, but let me illustrate it clearly. Even in Industries where production is primarily labour based and Capital inputs are very low (so your argument does not apply) workers are still payed far less (< than 1%) than the market price of the good. A Key example of this is Nike, who, as a brand label, charge high prices for their commodities, yet pay some of the lowest wages out of all mutinational corporations.

because most of the value dose not come fromt he labourer. in nike for example the value comes from its brand itself. if you put the same shoe out but called it "kindlles shoes" no one would be 80 bucks fro them. workers get payed in proportion to the value they put into the product. thus hand made sports cars makers make vast sums of money because their work is a big part of the value.



So you agree that his teacher is misguiding the students by failing to inform them off the reality of the US&#39; Foreign Exchange Mechanisms.

I don&#39;t think hsi teacher meant the US market is totally free, but is by and far one of the freest on earth.

[red team]

in nike for example the value comes from its brand itself. if you put the same shoe out but called it "kindlles shoes" no one would be 80 bucks fro them. workers get payed in proportion to the value they put into the product.

So what are you admitting here? That public image and company logos are worth more than intrinsic product quality?


thus hand made sports cars makers make vast sums of money because their work is a big part of the value.

Because hand made sports cars are better than precision machine tools made sports cars? :rolleyes:

[theraven]

So what are you admitting here? That public image and company logos are worth more than intrinsic product quality?

in some cases yes. that is why nike workers are payed so poorly.



Because hand made sports cars are better than precision machine tools made sports cars? rolleyes.gif

not nessacirly, but the worker who makes the hand crafted car puts consideriblly more effort into making it then someone running a percisoin machine. and supposedly that makes the car better. whether it does for not is for another debate, but all that really matters is that the hand crafters put consideriably more value into the car than say some machinist in detriot. thus they get payed more.

[Matty_UK]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2006, 02:50 AM


So what are you admitting here? That public image and company logos are worth more than intrinsic product quality?

in some cases yes. that is why nike workers are payed so poorly.
you&#39;re part of THE SPECTACLE maaaan

[theraven]

Originally posted by Matty_UK+Jul 18 2006, 11:10 AM--> (Matty_UK @ Jul 18 2006, 11:10 AM)
[email protected] 18 2006, 02:50 AM


So what are you admitting here? That public image and company logos are worth more than intrinsic product quality?

in some cases yes. that is why nike workers are payed so poorly.
you&#39;re part of THE SPECTACLE maaaan [/b]
yea.......what are you talking about?

[Invader Zim]

in some cases yes. that is why nike workers are payed so poorly.

Or, alternatively and I think more likely, because Nike are in search of profits. A huge dent to the profit marine is always lost through labour costs. So they minimise those costs by finding the cheapest labour available and exploiting it. They would do the same whether their shoes were worth £20-£120.

[theraven]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2006, 01:56 PM



in some cases yes. that is why nike workers are payed so poorly.

Or, alternatively and I think more likely, because Nike are in search of profits. A huge dent to the profit marine is always lost through labour costs. So they minimise those costs by finding the cheapest labour available and exploiting it. They would do the same whether their shoes were worth £20-£120.
they pay the labor based on how much they contribue to the products value and how valuabele they as a person are to the company. considierng

a) their labor while obviously essintial in the actual product itself is not where the majority fo the products value comes form

b) they are extremely low skilled and highly replaceb

thus their wages will be low

now if they were making somehting something where

a) their labor is a significant part of the value (say hand made cars or very intercriate rugs)

b) the skill required for that job is not possesed by a large number of people

then they would be payed substnatily more.

[Invader Zim]

a) their labor while obviously essintial in the actual product itself is not where the majority fo the products value comes form

No, it is where all the products value comes from, 100%. If there were no product there would be no profit.



b) they are extremely low skilled and highly replaceb

And?



a) their labor is a significant part of the value (say hand made cars or very intercriate rugs)

And the company manufactured in third world countries? I think you would find that the labour costs would still be much lower than in first world countries.

[theraven]

No, it is where all the products value comes from, 100%. If there were no product there would be no profit.


the product does not have value (or at least not the value it sells at) just by existing. esp. in my example of nike shoes. the value there comes from the advertising and brand itself, not something abotu the shoes. thus they are payed what the shoe itself is worth, not the added marketing.


And?

and that makes them highly replacable by people willing to work for less.



And the company manufactured in third world countries? I think you would find that the labour costs would still be much lower than in first world countries.

and i think you&#39;d find the cost of living in those countires is much less.

[Invader Zim]

and that makes them highly replacable by people willing to work for less.

Ah, so the pay of the workers isn&#39;t due to the value of the labour they put in, but because socio-economic conditions, which Nike then exploits, forces workers into competition in order to sell their labour. Thus the pay is in fact in ratio to how how far Nike think they can go ripping the workers off, not in ratio to the value of their labour at all.

Thanks for that, you really cleared it up for me.

[theraven]

Originally posted by [email protected] 18 2006, 07:27 PM


and that makes them highly replacable by people willing to work for less.

Ah, so the pay of the workers isn&#39;t due to the value of the labour they put in, but because socio-economic conditions, which Nike then exploits, forces workers into competition in order to sell their labour. Thus the pay is in fact in ratio to how how far Nike think they can go ripping the workers off, not in ratio to the value of their labour at all.

Thanks for that, you really cleared it up for me.
yes they are payed the value of their labor. the value of the labor is generally figured out by how mcuh do you have to pay the kind of workesr you need to get them to do the job. since to make shoes you can have any kidn of worker, you pay them enough that its better then lwhat they had before. in china and such this is basicly replacing small farms where the people made little and barely survived. thus the pay they make in the facotires is better then before.

a workers labor value is not detmried by the final price of the product.

[Janus]

yes they are payed the value of their labor
Then how do the bourgeois make their profits if the workers are paid the full value of their profits?


in china and such this is basicly replacing small farms where the people made little and barely survived. thus the pay they make in the facotires is better then before.
More like the opposite. They can barely survive now with their pay.

[theraven]

Then how do the bourgeois make their profits if the workers are paid the full value of their profits?

who said the full value of their profits? i just said the full value of their labor.



More like the opposite. They can barely survive now with their pay.

they are doing much better then when they were small farmers...

[FatFreeMilk]

Originally posted by [email protected] 14 2006, 01:29 PM
So today in class we were talking about the American System and Supply and Demand

an economic expert was quoted saying "The U.S. allows other countries the opportunity to grow, by creating free markets and letting them import their products into the U.S."

He also listed the 5 FACTORS OF PRODUCTION.

1. LABOR(in a free market you get to choose who to work for)
2. CAPITAL
3. ENTREPRENEURS
4. PHSYICAL RESOURCES(not sure what this means)
5. INFORMATION RESOURCES(technology and such)

This was the discussion in my classroom today. :rolleyes:
Wow I learned all this stuff in my miserable econ class last semester. I don&#39;t remember touching up on #5 so much though.


We spent a lot of time making supply and demand charts and all sorts of other wonderful things that I&#39;ll probably never use again.

[Janus]

i just said the full value of their labor.
:blink: If they were paid the full value of their work, they would be a lot better off.


they are doing much better then when they were small farmers...
:lol: No, they are not. They were doing much better as farmers until the government began shifting all its focus to the cities.