barrett/barrettruth.com
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

fix(post): fix folding

Browse source
This commit is contained in:
Barrett Ruth 2024-06-26 22:43:25 -05:00
parent c2e8721fa1
commit b6b3e08886
1 changed files with 54 additions and 43 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

97
posts/economics/models-of-production.html
View file

@ -211,50 +211,61 @@
\bar{A}^\frac{1}{1-\alpha}(\frac{\bar{s}}{\bar{d}})^\frac{\alpha}{1-\alpha})\] \bar{A}^\frac{1}{1-\alpha}(\frac{\bar{s}}{\bar{d}})^\frac{\alpha}{1-\alpha})\]
</p> </p>
</div> </div>
<div class="fold"><h3>analysis</h3></div> <div class="fold">
<p> <h3>analysis</h3>
Using both mathematical intuition and manipulating the visualization </div>
above, we find that: <div>
</p> <p>
<ul style="list-style: unset"> Using both mathematical intuition and manipulating the
<li> visualization above, we find that:
\(\bar{A}\) has a positive relationship with steady-state output </p>
</li> <ul style="list-style: unset">
<li> <li>
Capital is influenced by workforce size, TFP, and savings rate \(\bar{A}\) has a positive relationship with steady-state output
</li> </li>
<li> <li>
Capital output share's \(\alpha\) impact on output is twofold: Capital is influenced by workforce size, TFP, and savings rate
<ol> </li>
<li>Directly through capital quantity</li> <li>
<li>Indirectly through TFP</li> Capital output share's \(\alpha\) impact on output is twofold:
</ol> <ol>
</li> <li>Directly through capital quantity</li>
<li> <li>Indirectly through TFP</li>
Large deviations in capital from steady-state \(K^*\) induce net </ol>
investments of larger magnitude, leading to an accelerated </li>
reversion to the steady-state <li>
</li> Large deviations in capital from steady-state \(K^*\) induce net
</ul> investments of larger magnitude, leading to an accelerated
<p> reversion to the steady-state
Lastly (and perhaps most importantly), exogenous parameters </li>
\(\bar{s}, \bar{d}\), and \(\bar{A}\) all have immense ramifications <li>
on economic status. For example, comparing the difference in country Economies stagnate at the steady-state \((K^*,Y^*)\)&mdash;this
\(C_1\)&apos;s output versus \(C_2\)&apos;s using the Solow Model, model provides no avenues for long-run growth.
we find that a difference in economic performance can only be </li>
explained by these factors: \[ </ul>
\frac{Y_1}{Y_2}=\frac{\bar{A_1}}{\bar{A_2}}(\frac{\bar{s_1}}{\bar{s_2}})^\frac{\alpha}{1-\alpha} <p>
\] Lastly (and perhaps most importantly), exogenous parameters
</p> \(\bar{s}, \bar{d}\), and \(\bar{A}\) all have immense
<p> ramifications on economic status. For example, comparing the
We see that TFP is more important in explaining the differences in difference in country \(C_1\)&apos;s output versus \(C_2\)&apos;s
per capital output using the Solow Model, we find that a difference in economic
(\(\frac{1}{1-\alpha}>\frac{\alpha}{1-\alpha},\alpha\in[0,1)\)). performance can only be explained by these factors: \[
However, the Solow Model does not give any insight in to how to \frac{Y_1}{Y_2}=\frac{\bar{A_1}}{\bar{A_2}}(\frac{\bar{s_1}}{\bar{s_2}})^\frac{\alpha}{1-\alpha}
alter what it considers to be the most important predictor of \]
output. </p>
</p> <p>
We see that TFP is more important in explaining the differences in
per capital output
(\(\frac{1}{1-\alpha}>\frac{\alpha}{1-\alpha},\alpha\in[0,1)\)).
<!-- TODO: poor phrasing -->
Notably, the Solow Model does not give any insights into how to
alter the most important predictor of output, TFP.
</p>
</div>
<h2>romer</h2> <h2>romer</h2>
<!-- TODO: transition talking about "Romer model does, though" -->
<!-- TODO: say the romer model provides avenue for LR growth -->
<!-- TODO: dynamics?????? -->
<h2>romer-solow</h2> <h2>romer-solow</h2>
</article> </article>
</div> </div>