Wednesday, 23 January 2008

the simplicity of economics

this curve represents, in its entirety, why i think economics is superior as a subject as opposed to, say, history. they both deal with how humans behave, but there are no generalisations that are blindingly obvious like the one on the left.

it conveys only one thing. that if a man is offered more money, he will work more only uptil a certain point, after which instead of working, he will opt for 'leisure'.
this just makes so much sense, it had to be framed and put up somewhere, and this was it.

this other one is also economics, and slightly less obvious at first glance, but just as intuitive.

sadly, this was the only one i could find, and it's rather bad

x axis is quantity, y axis is price

because people are asking for a lot, at wp (it looks like), employers are only willing to employ A amount of labour, but because price is so high, there are B amount of people waiting to be employed. since there is obviously an excess, B - A number of people are left unemployed
both these diagrams looked blindingly obvious to me, so i just had to stop and say, 'gosh, thats a really good piece of thinking!'

i think that if i can't write good fiction/poetry anymore, i might as well write about economics. if im really bored (read if im seriously struggling for material, which is extremely likely), i might even write about a game.....
or even about gandhi...........
who knows?


Anonymous said...

After studying the gooddamn subject for two years, i conclude: economics is a subject where the ends justify the means; you can come up with the most interesting of theories, all you need is a bunch of flimsy premises that are as flexible as flubber ... sharan

Prabha Mohan said...

... and thats really how I got into fiction. I did economics first and learnt how to elaborate the obvious in the most interesting way possible,,, and then joined film school and started adding characters to the mix.

and the good thing about it is that it can be whatever u want it to be..

which is why two economists can come up with two completely opposite theories and can both win a nobel prize each.