全球市场产能过剩问题研究--悉尼Assignment代写范文

悉尼Assignment代写范文:“全球市场产能过剩问题研究”，这篇论文主要描述的是在20世界末全球市场奉行着新自由主义政策，已经严重阻碍了世界经济的增长，企业的发展处于强制竞争的环境当中，各国的经济在经历了大萧条和二战的破坏后，都在复苏的过程中牢牢的处于政府的控制当中，企业没有有效的手段抗衡政府的管制政策。

During the Great Depression and World War II, national economies generally are placed under the ultimate control of the government, even those very high degree of market countries, too, the international economic relations is also the IMF and the World Bank consciously be managed. Western governments have varying degrees of support for the union to be on commercial management, strengthen control of the financial markets, and the establishment of the social welfare system. They also by managing aggregate demand in order to achieve high employment and rapid economic growth, which is called the "Keynesian revolution." Commercial and financial interests to accept these changes, in part because of a strong post-war capital controls and low levels of trade and investment flows, so that they are not against the government regulatory policy reliable means. Quarter of a century after the war continued global prosperity - the so-called modern capitalism "golden years" to strengthen the market economy requires a strong social adjustment to the effective functioning of the faith. The golden age of the inherent contradictions of capitalism eventually led to the boom end. Economic instability began in the late 1960s, with the two oil crises in the 1970s, the impact of the disintegration of the Bretton Woods system and third world countries debt accumulation, the economic crisis broke out. These issues brought about a strong movement whose leader is the business, especially financial interests, the campaign aimed at combating government regulatory capacity of the economy, with the free market "invisible hand" instead of a conscious society regulation, eliminating cross-border movement of goods and currency restrictions, creating an integrated global economy.

Supporters of neo-liberal globalization neoclassical economic theory to use to sell their programs. Standard neoclassical theory is that, like college textbooks in the perfectly competitive market model, as in the absence of government intervention under the conditions of a country and the global economy will be able to run efficiently. Competitive market pressures will make labor and productive capital are fully utilized, so that the total demand and full employment output equilibrium is met Say's Law. Therefore, the Government of Keynesian aggregate demand management is unnecessary, globally integrated financial markets will improve efficiency and productivity, because, allegedly able to put the world's savings to the optimal configuration of productive investment projects. Cross-border restrictions on imports, exports and investment also can improve the efficiency of the cancellation, because this can be put behind domestic enterprises on a more oligopolistic competition under pressure, and you can make a small state enterprises can enjoy the global economies of scale benefits. In short, the neo-liberals who believe that as long as the global free-market system replaced the government-led economic system, will give all countries lead to higher revenue growth and better economic performance.

However, critical of neoliberalism non-mainstream scholars believe that, once given up to growth-oriented active demand management, will result in a slowdown in real GDP growth and unemployment increases. High unemployment and "flexible" labor markets, in turn caused by low growth in real wages and unfair intensified. Financial liberalization has led to high real interest rates, and increased instability in global financial markets. For developing countries, instead of with the neo-liberal interventionist economic development policy, but also weaken their rapid long-term growth potential. These problems are not globalization itself is the inevitable result, but by the neo-liberal system and practice exceptional caused.

Although both sides have chosen the data to their advantage to defend their respective positions, but in the past two decades the main evidence to support the critics' side. Compared with the golden age, and now worldwide income and capital accumulation are showing significant growth slowdown in the growth rate of productivity and real wages decline, the majority of the country's social inequality. Real interest rates are high, the financial crisis more and more frequently (especially developing countries), rising unemployment, outside East, the gap between developing and developed countries is widening, while the 1997 Asian financial crisis, East Asian countries growth has also slowed.

What caused the neoliberal era of long-term global overcapacity? This paper, we focus on the neo-liberal globalization caused by one of the most important economic issues, that most of the world's major competitive industry produces a lot of excess capacity and sustainability issues.

About global overcapacity and there is no official data, and even how to define and measure an excess capacity and no consensus. However, from consulting firms, industry trade associations and international organizations, research reports agree that massive overcapacity has been plagued by almost all the global competitive industry of at least two decades. "Business Week" that: "everywhere supply exceeds demand, causing prices to fall and profits to increase damage and layoffs." Former General Electric chairman Jack Welch believes that "almost all industries there is excess capacity." "The Wall Street Daily "said:" From cashmere sweaters to jeans, from silver to aluminum cans, in excess among the world. "" The Economist "worry," overcapacity and lack of demand will cause severe deflation, "and that the current global sales and the gap between production capacity was "the most since the 1930s." Overcapacity in the steel close to 20%, the car's excess capacity to reach 30%, while with the recent emergence in the semiconductor and communications industry spare capacity compared to the figures fairly small.

To fully understand the long-term excess capacity, we must first recognize and neoliberal global expansion was accompanied by a significant slowdown in economic growth. Although economists are disputing the cause of the problem, but the fact that the slowdown empirical data from the point of view is beyond rebuttal. Long-term growth on the global economy, the most widely accepted as the OECD report was made in Madison: global average annual growth rate of real GDP from the golden era of 1950 to 4.9% in 1973, a decrease of 3% for the 1973-1998 year , a drop of 39%, per capita GDP to count, a decline of 55%; in Latin America, after two periods, GDP growth fell to 43 percent, compared to 38 percent decline in Africa. GDP growth is the only major region to improve only in Asia (excluding Japan), while the region from the 1997 Asian financial crisis lessened. UN and Madison with a different set of methods to calculate the result is: the average annual global GDP growth was 5.4% in the 1960s, 1970s and 4.1% in the 1980s to 3% in the 1990s to 2.3% .

Advocates of neo-liberalism did not foresee the global economic growth slowdown, because they depend on Say's Law, that supply lagging behind demand is unlikely. As Nobel Prize winner, former World Bank chief economist Joseph Stiglitz said, neo-liberal economic theory is embodied in the "market fundamentalism, it assumes that the market can run perfectly on labor as well as any commodity or factor The match supply with demand inevitable, "the supply and demand of capital as well. However, Keynes taught us that in an unregulated market economy, aggregate demand is likely to be long enough, such as in the Great Depression. For since the early 1970s, the slowdown in global demand growth, given a convincing explanation is not difficult, and many economists have done this. The initial formation of excess capacity and therefore not mysterious. But why the supply of global demand growth has not slowed down due to a corresponding adjustment to achieve slower but more balanced economic expansion? The answer is not clear. Neo-liberals could not foresee the long-term possibility of the existence of excess capacity, because in standard neoclassical micro theory, this is not going to happen. Even there are Keynesian macroeconomic theory is blind, because it assumes that the slowdown in aggregate demand through the impact on investment and productivity, resulting in a corresponding increase aggregate supply deceleration.

The author of the long-term overcapacity explanation combines Schumpeter and Marx, and summarized as follows: the two oil crises and deal with inflation taken subsequent type of macroeconomic policy tightening down the demand, and in the late 1970s turned the world's major countries neo-liberal policies, the world economy needs to grow resulting in further obstacles. Demand growth in turn led to the stagnation of the global competitive industry excess capacity dramatically. Meanwhile, the global liberalization of goods and money to eliminate restrictions on cross-border flows, domestic oligopoly lost protection, the intensity of global competition intensified. Initial existence of a large excess capacity, coupled with cross-border flows of capital barriers are removed, causing the company to survive competition war. As will be explained in detail, which allows enterprises to adopt those further restrict global demand growth and capacity expansion initiatives, they are more than neo-classical or Keynesian framework is able to understand the speed to create more excess capacity. Thus, the global neo-liberalism at the macro and micro levels between economic activity, sparking a destructive interaction a vicious economic cycle.

What are the causes of the slowdown in global demand growth?

Due to the global slowdown in demand has been a lot of progress and even mainstream economists analyzed, so here I list only six hamper global growth in aggregate demand factors, each of which are rooted in a global neoliberal regime and policies.

First, the global neo-liberal wages and employment caused by slow growth, inhibition of the growth of consumer demand. Wage growth limited by the following factors: high unemployment, the decline of unions, the government efforts to support the weakening of collective bargaining, as well as worldwide productivity growth slowdown. A pair of 19 countries (excluding the U.S.) study found that in the early 1970s the rapid growth, the average annual growth rate of actual expenditures from 1979 to 1989 to 1.2% in 1989 to 1996 and further to 0.7%. People worried about losing their jobs rising rapidly, which is due to imported products increased competition, increased mobility of physical capital, in the 1990s the tide of mergers and acquisitions, as well as labor-saving technological progress and enterprises to adopt personnel streamlining and restructuring strategies, for long-term job stability constant "churning." By weakening the bargaining power of workers, job insecurity depress real wages and household income growth. In many countries, the tax burden from capital to labor, coupled with rising household debt burden, workers disposable income growth is hampered.

Second, the evolution of the global financial system down the global economic growth. Since 1980, the independent, conservative and suffering from inflation, the central bank of troubled ensuring high standards of real interest rates. 1980 to 1990 the spread of financial deregulation, and further strengthen the high real interest rates independent of the central bank's preferences. For those who carry out low interest rates in order to boost growth and employment in national, global investors can more easily take advantage of capital flight means to punish them. Further, the height of the global financial market instability has greatly increased the bank rate and currency crises, the crisis in the area of ??its influence caused a severe recession and lead to financial investors who provide loans to its more demanding The risk premium.

Third, the private and public investment spending slowdown. This is due to the low margin, high real interest rates, increased uncertainty, the total demand growth stagnation and conservative attacks on government spending.

Fourth, fiscal policy become more and more austerity. Europe and North America, government spending is still large, but there is no doubt that, in addition to cope with the 1980s and early 1990s, low growth and high unemployment, government spending there had been a significant growth, with the conservative political forces unprecedented strong government spending in many countries the proportion of their income reached a peak after the beginning of fall. As government spending and net taxes on aggregate demand stimulus in the 1990s developed structural budget deficit to GDP decreased by 3.4%, and further hinder growth of aggregate demand.

Fifth, including the G7 governments, the World Bank and the IMF, including the internal and external forces started to implement neoliberal liberalization project, severely weakened including in East Asia in the third world countries government-led development model, reducing the developing world's total demand growth.

Sixth, IMF and the World Bank in developing countries led austerity and restructuring projects, severely limiting the growth of the global economy.

Why neoclassical "perfect competition" theory can help us understand the long-term overcapacity?

To make a long-term overcapacity adequate explanation, we need a theory of competition facing reality. In the neoclassical theory, intense or "complete" competition usually brings optimum efficiency and rapid elimination of excess capacity. Mainstream theory of perfect competition, the main concern is the beauty of a perfectly competitive equilibrium state, rather than to go through to reach this state of confusion and often destructive non-equilibrium process. Accurate understanding of the neoclassical theory of competition where the short board is very important.

Business analysis and non-academic historians know most commercial, competition may become excessively until the enterprise, "deadly", including price wars and low profits, dangerous debt burden, as well as those who may be necessary in the short term but the long-term damage to industrial efficiency practices (for example, in labor relations on the scorched earth policy). Neo-classical microscopic theory empirically untenable through two key assumptions, excluding fierce competition has the destructive aspects: first look innocuous on the surface, that the unit cost of production as output growth The rapid rise; second is the capital can be "free" or no consideration to exit from the low-margin industry.

One of the main tenets of the theory is that competition will lead to lower prices, and has been reduced to just equal to the economists call "marginal cost" so far. Marginal cost is the last one additional unit of output consumed by the cost of production (labor, raw materials, etc.). If the unit cost of production at any level of output remains unchanged, then the marginal cost and average cost will be equal. When fully competitive drive prices equal to marginal cost, the firm's total revenue will be equal to the total production cost, and no extra income to make up the company's "fixed" costs, depreciation and obsolescence is prepared to maintain the cost of capital stock, or compensate those for enterprises to provide financial capital investors to pay interest and dividends costs. In such cases, competition will lead representative or typical business cycle in each fixed costs have suffered irreparable damage, and ultimately enable industry will not long continue. It should be noted that most of the world's leading companies in key industries have a huge investment in fixed costs.

Neoclassical theory through the unit cost of production is always with the rapid increase in the growth of output of this experience on the mistaken assumption that to cover up the intense competition destructive side. This assumption implies that the marginal cost and price will exceed the average cost of production, equilibrium, unit of commodity prices and the difference between the average cost of production is sufficient to cover all the fixed costs, even if the competition, a typical enterprise is not a loss. Consider a simple numerical example. Suppose a typical enterprise cost of production of the first items is $ 1, the cost of producing second product is $ 2, producing a third piece is the final product cost is $ 3, then, the average unit cost of production is two dollars. Even if the competition has forced prices down to marginal cost $ 3, the enterprise will remain in the average cost of production obtained on the basis of $ 1. The price and the difference between the average cost of production will be sufficient to cover the fixed costs of spending, so businesses can happily in the industry to survive. Then the, if the unit production costs remained unchanged at $ 2, what would be the consequences? Apparently marginal cost and price will be $ 2, therefore, the price will be equal to the average cost of production, enterprises will face fixed costs irreparable damage. Consider the industry when the price is $ 3 equilibrium situation, assuming that the decline in demand and led to a temporary excess capacity, production and sales fell due, the marginal costs and prices will fall, causing prices and average cost between differences are narrowing, which is insufficient to cover all the fixed costs. Thus, excess capacity can at least let the typical enterprise in Inner Mongolia by the loss in the short term. So, the problem of overcapacity in the neo-classical conditions will become protracted do? Here, the second assumption began to play a role. If we assume that the exit is "free" or no loss, then the excess capacity resulting loss will enable enterprises to exit the industry, and put them to productive capital transfers to higher-margin industry until the excess capacity is eliminated so far. When re underutilized capacity, the left companies will regain sufficient income to compensate for the high production costs and fixed costs, the industry will return to a balanced state.

Neoclassical theory told us a story: In a functioning market system, overcapacity is a way to self-repair, transitional phenomenon, therefore, of course, impossible permanent. Unfortunately, the story is fictional. To understand why overcapacity becomes protracted, we must put on the marginal costs and investment capital transferability assumption based on a realistic basis.

Global trade and investment is dominated by some of the following industries such as automotive, electronics, semiconductor, aircraft, consumer durables, shipbuilding, steel, petrochemical and banking, and I refer to them as the core industries. Empirical studies on core industries show that, with the improvement of capacity utilization, their marginal costs are not usually rise with output growth, but remained unchanged or even decline, unless it has reached full capacity utilization levels. Therefore,if the core of unfettered competition has forced the industry to reduce product prices equal to marginal costs, and ultimately will lead to a series of corporate bankruptcy.

From this important and emerging information technology and communications (ITC) industry is most easily seen, the products of these industries are often close to zero marginal cost, make one copy of the software or to increase a person's network services almost zero cost, and therefore, Many mainstream economists also recognize neoclassical theory of perfect competition can not be used ITC industries. For example, the president of Harvard University, former U.S. Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers on the claim, ITC companies have a "huge fixed costs and a relatively smaller marginal cost." He believes that this "new economy is the Schumpeterian": "to promote the production of unique power from the temporary monopoly power, if not monopoly power, the price will be down to marginal cost line, the high initial fixed costs will not be recovered, so the relentless pursuit of monopoly power to become the driving force in the new economy. "

51due留学教育原创版权郑重声明：原创留学生作业代写范文源自编辑创作，未经官方许可，网站谢绝转载。对于侵权行为，未经同意的情况下，51Due有权追究法律责任。

51due为留学生提供最好的悉尼Assignment代写服务，亲们可以进入主页了解和获取更多assignment代写范文 提供美国作业代写服务，详情可以咨询我们的客服QQ:800020041哟。-xz