Gamesmith94134: Redistribution or Inclusion?

Mr. Ricardo Hausmann,

I am sorry that I cannot finish the pie of capital that you imagine. Philosophically, I see the redistribution and inclusion as two separate entities when productivity and consumption shares in the capital that is being redistributed or included. Whenever, inequality comes in the shares are individually contributed to a firm or an economy. Perhaps, I would like to share my idea of two separate spheres that are intertwined at a point of supply and demand, often I called the marginal affordability, connecting more like an infinite sign or “8” shape that what the energy embedded.

First, I would think of the capital that involved asset, human resource and equity. When inequality comes in that human resources share the assets and equity that the supply and demand are the energy that circulate infinitely just like energy either in redistribution or inclusion on the separate cycles like the “8” shape. Perhaps, inequality means the two cycles are not balanced and redistribution or inclusion is not sufficiently provides its energy to circulate. In assumption, goods cannot be sold through the firm would blame on the price or value; and availability of job can redistribute to low tech in matching the need of the firm. So, in the capitalist world demand a higher skill to compete. Implicitly, we are being exploited by the current high tech or redistribution that never included in term of the human resources; and the demand stop employment.

Secondly, when you apply the micro-economic to the firm, their workers must be awarded for its contribution or else he will be cut. Perhaps, he deserved more even on the surpluses; but the fact is that the micro-economic did not complete the sphere at the point of macro-economic that what the Human resources shares of the assets or equity in the inclusion through the expansion on the capital it created. Then, the balance is off. It makes the larger equity that human resources cannot comply. It is deflation in undercutting the asset the firm produced. Since the two spheres interact, the cycle will shrink as well after unemployment rises. We called it recession. So, Mr. Ricardo Hausmann said the size of the pie varies radically; because they are divided at the point of marginal affordability that “have” and “have not” travel in a cycle in supporting the value or supply that is overpriced or not demanded.

Thirdly, how do we arrive at this inequality? I had criticize India for lack of a competitive price that India subsidize its goods that it did not provided a market system internally in matching the present external globalized market. We often blame on the dollar or institutionalization that the corporation sovereignty has broken down the economy of its individualism; or we may take the firms too seriously on competitive awards or even surpluses. However, I think Mr. Samuelson have taught me will in understanding economics in Econ1; I may be naive to accept the simplicity of supply and demand. I think Mr. Ricardo Hausmann should expand the pie as the energy of infinite that goes around in two separate cycles. Perhaps, they are redistribution and inclusion meets at the marginal affordability if capital includes assets, human resources and equity.

Venezuela definitely needs a recession to cut inflation.



May the Buddha bless you?

