Conclusion: Difference between revisions

From Dickinson College Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
← Older editNewer edit →
No edit summary
Brill (talk | contribs)
37 edits
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
:<br>Economic growth cannot be fully explained by cultural and genetic factors. However, Clark’s new ideas on labor quality and downward social mobility for economic growth are definitely useful in understanding growth and development of countries in the past as well as in the present. Clark’s arguments on the role played by culture in shaping economic growth are quite plausible but his genetic argument to justify the English economy’s growth circa 1800 is not convincing. Moreover, his new ideas do not debunk the generally accepted idea that good institutions are essential for growth. We conclude that for sustained economic growth, good institutions are a necessary condition and cultural and genetic diffusion of good virtues might not be a necessary condition.
We see through this data that if economics fails to account for the power of social norms, it cannot accurately portray the decision making process of human beings.
 
As Akerlof stated:

Revision as of 05:45, 3 December 2007

We see through this data that if economics fails to account for the power of social norms, it cannot accurately portray the decision making process of human beings.

As Akerlof stated:

Retrieved from "https://wiki.dickinson.edu/index.php?title=Conclusion&oldid=34155"