Alfred Marshall BOOK V GENERAL RELATIONS OF DEMAND, SUPPLY AND VALUE

Alfred Marshall BOOK V GENERAL RELATIONS OF DEMAND, SUPPLY AND VALUE

Notes For further analysis on creation of article as applied to my theories on this at best para-professional adrenaline fueled economic blog cite.

http://www.econlib.org/library/Marshall/marP28.html#Bk.V,Ch.I
"Introductory on Markets"
small excerpt for the non professional economists:
Notes while reading:
"But the organization of markets is intimately connected both as cause and effect with money, credit, and foreign trade"
"with commercial and industrial fluctuations"
"combinations of producers and of merchants, of employers and employed"
"things which must be made to order to suit particular individuals"
"that is, a price determined with little direct reference to cost of production, but chiefly by a consideration of what the market will bear.'
that statement interests me. If it is so that comparative advantage has started to turn into absolute advantage much like what Senator Sherman wished to oppose during the unregulated years of capitalist comparative advantage and absolute advantage believers. Then I believe that statement could be shown in light of jobs equated to taxes for government, then equated to economic warfare to link back into the idea that Senator Sherman had in vague paraphrasing which was that absolute advantage is bad and comparative advantage leads to monopolies and monosponies. Which like Senator Sherman and his wishes along with the leaders at that time. I oppose monopolies, monoposines and cartel activities. As it creates unfair marketplaces and creates a feudalistic style citizenry. As business or SOE's become more powerful and can easily control marketplaces with economic warfare strategies to oppose any opposition, much like what we saw during Senator Sherman's time and much like what we are seeing now in the SOE, time which will be my political campaign if of course they do not find a way to take me out before, I can get to the podium, or career job, or government service, or privatized loan warrior.n That statement stood out.

"In applying economic reasoning's in practice it is often difficult to ascertain how far the movements of supply and demand in any one place are influenced by those in another." I am sure we have graph, algo's and the such, I still need to work further on how the servy bell curve is driving George Soros boom bust theory in the free markets, which then in turn drive the neo-mercantilst markets. However, leaving the service free markets vulnerable to liquidity failures at the end of the boom bust, as we have seen with the neo-mercantalist having to buy up the service free markets debt during the trough, recession and possible depression. Very interesting statement lights a bulb.

"There are many special causes which may widen or narrow the market of any particular commodity: but nearly all those things for which there is a very wide market are in universal demand, and capable of being easily and exactly described." Now this is my kind of statement. For every action their is a reaction kind of statement. Lets see so my scope in comparison to economics is pretty narrowed. it realms around the Chinese SOE's activities and their cartel like interactions which is causing a sort of absolute advantage in the international marketplace and pretty much at home as their SOE's currently without champions hold a 40% stake in their GDP without allowing the private sector to gain a proper healthy hold. Should do an article on absolute advantage too. I think Senator Sherman would shine down from the positive place that he is in if I do. To Senator Sherman, this whiskey and orange juice and my pipe full of tobacco is for you you old fair player you. It is not easy to stand up to those that wish for dominance like the old capitalists or the new Communist Strategies of SOE' cartels. However, men and women like us, well, ruffles my feather, I am not hurting no one and I am just merely observing and analyzing and i think both sides could respect my roaring, about the issue. You are not getting an absolute advantage. Comparative advantage needs to be narrowed and properly addressed in application, as I believe it is to freely and vague applied. Long breath, future wife and kids would probable kill me, though. No tell my wife I lover her, it is that darn comparative advantage theory needs to be rethought in mass economic media. I know it has, just the theories of narrowing and application of proper have not caught on. Anyways, that is corny back to Alfred Marshall.

matter of fact lets doa  little absolute advantage study here, This is outside the text of Alred Marshall

Definition:
"Absolute advantage: A country that can produce a good at a lower cost than another country is said to have an absolute advantage in the production of that good. When two countries have absolute advantages in different goods, there are gains of trade to be had."

Ok so lets do a little application. The theory as applied to China have an absolute advantage in international trade as obviously their trade surpluses have shown for 30 years with the US. Goes like this. The US can obtain an absolute advantage in high technology and hate to say it in a snobby manner but service industries as it is 70% of our darn GDP. Then this allows the US to create High Technology while China produces everything else. Ok here is why absolute advantage failed with the capitalist of old. Free enterprises wished to create monopolies so that they could crate products cheaper and everyone could buy from them. So that another company could create a monopoly and then buy the other products from them. In turn this would allow, each country when applied in depth and not at surface value to be able to create the cheapest product for the consumer right. Wrong, I hypothesis that the supply and demand curve would show as the monopolies grew stronger and stronger the consumer would be able to buy less and less as the absolute advantages of two free enterprises grew stronger and stronger. This is it creates a Soviet Union type centralized economy with little spreading out like American economics and my stream theory of economics. This lets take one of the free enterprises companies it would stop other smaller companies from being able to compete as such creating a dependency on that one business, as no one else would be able join the market place (much like China's current free trade regimes that it has pushed with Taiwan, India, and others. As China's SOE Champions have Championed Cartel activities it will cause hardship for India and Taiwan as they will not be able to protect their smaller business.) When smaller business can't join the market or compete fairly in then creates detriments to the consumer. This detriment is that the consumer can't find jobs, as such the absolute advantages in a capitalist views, hold that industries market shares.

   So lets apply this to international market places to China's SOE's absolute advantages. Well first of all the theory has been dis proven in application. This is because the theory does not take into account economic warfare and political and institutional aims. As old economic warfare guards new that the purpose of economics was to be able to sell smaller countries machinery and products so that the selling country gains value. China nows this. This then has meant that the US has lost over the years its absolute advantage to China, as the absolute advantage in manufacturing and production inherently unbenounced to proper calculations of jobs taxes, and economic warfare means that it is cheaper to even produce the high technology in China. We saw this with Van Jones I believe analysis and the Secretary of Energies analysis to spend more green tech stimulus spending to create manufacturing jobs abroad than they did at home. See Energy cites. As such this means that absolute advantage has been disprove in theory and in application. Because right now at least in 2008 we had a huge high tech trade deficit with China. Who I believe was leading in Nuc tech, machinery tech like trains, and other high tech like computer parts. So lets further this. As the theory of absolute advantage leads to a theory of gains of trade. It would only be fair to analyze that theory too. getting there. this is brain storm is getting stream lined. I think my future seminars and lectures should be off the cuff. or if wify prefers off the top of the mind.

Gains of trade:
"Gains trade in economics refers to net benefits to agents from voluntary trading with each other. It is commonly described as resulting from:
specialization in production from division of labor, economies of scale, scope, and agglomeration[1] and relative availability of factor resources in types of output by farms, businesses, location[2] and economies
a resulting increase in total output possibilities
trade through markets from sale of one type of output for other, more highly valued goods"

Total output possibilities I guess is were i would see the weakness to the theory in non professional opinion. lets see.

So lets see absolute advantage creates a better possible output for the two countries. Ok lets say this is an opportunity basis. That means one country creates lets say manufacturing and the other does lets say services. As such, then the total output possibilities for one country would be to create the production and they could do it the cheapest, in a macro vague without specifics like cartel activities, which is a regulation to absolute advantages. So then the other country would be able to do services at its cheapest. However, what is forgotten is that they are two different countries and as such are prone to differences. This means that a theory of liquidity needs to be applied. As such, currently China has the absolute advantage in manufacturing. They know this and they are glad to do it. As they wish to push for a currency that is backed by their current blitzing strategy of foreign reserve holdings and debt purchasing in the international market place. At which right now as they have the absolute advantage to that means they also have have the absolute advantage in liquidity. As when the free markets who have absolute advantage sin services, as we have already disprove that high tech is just produced where every the absolute advantage to produce is, which is China factually and statistically proven. So back to services.

   As such after the free market business cycles go from boom to bust, driven by the service demand supply by employment to market shares. The business cycle goes down. This then allows China to stay liquid able and in turn gain their favor for international control. Now here is where absolute advantage does not properly regulate or calculate. That is that China is a single party Dictatorial Democracy. This means that they do vote however, the Communist party has a death grip with uneven political market shares, or abilities to even the political market shares. This makes absolute advantage a dangerous theory. As it does not allow for the most political freedoms. because as the Chinese Communist party use absolute advantage to create mini monopolies and monopsonies through SOE cartel activities it will inherently push its political ideological perspectives into power. This means were the SOE cartels go the Communist parties influence becomes huge.
  as such, I say my dear watson, absolute advantage to me, needs Senator Sherman's respects as applied to his life. Along with the detriment of my economic stream situation that states that privatized free enterprises allow economics to create more quality among the masses as it allows for economics to flow properly with regulations AND WHEN A FAIR MARKET PLACE IS REGULATED FOR UNLIKE THE THEORIES OF ALLOWANCE OF SOE CARTELS AND ABSOLUTE ADVANTAGES OF NOW. Therefore, my stream theory has been proven in both China and Russia in application and as a holding pattern in the US. However, the US is currently to afraid to stand up feel the adrenaline properly address and apply Senator Sherman's life's work and wishes for fair marketplace through regulations on absolute advantages,
I am a moderate I believe in middle ground is the greenest so we should build there.

Ok back to Alfred Marhsall
Well Alfred you are going to have to wait. Just because I am a pagan does not mean i do not like to hear a good lecture on spirituality now and then, and I know a pretty good darn place to go get one. In simpleton's words. I need to go to church tomorrow. and I have a small business meeting that night. So bud.