how made the theory of compartive advantage?
449521
Davied Richardo was the 1st who set this theory
113999
A friend of mine has been trying to explain rational behavior in terms of evolution and such.  I think you might be interested in reading it.
35846
In economics, the cost-of-production theory of value is the belief that the value of an object is decided by the resources that went into making it. The cost can be composed of any of the factors of production including labour, capital, land, or technology.\n\nTwo of the most common cost-of-production theories are the medieval just price theory and the classical labor theory of value. The labor theory of value, which interprets labor-value as the determinant of prices, was first developed by Adam Smith and later expanded by David Ricardo and Karl Marx. Most classical economists (as well as nearly all Marxists) subscribe to it. However, Marx's theory is not a true cost-of-production theory since the value of a commodity contains a component of surplus value unrelated to the physical cost of producing it. The magnitude of this surplus value may be unrelated to production-costs. A somewhat different theory of cost-determined prices is provided by the "neo-Ricardian school" of Piero Sraffa and his followers.\n\nThe most common counterpoint to this is the marginal theory of value which asserts that economic value is set by the consumer's marginal utility. This is the view most commonly held by the majority of contemporary mainstream economists.
149263
Trade allows countries to specialize in the good(s) in which they have a comparative advantage (Ricardian Trade Theory). This increases the overall output of the world.
557683
Hi,\n\nNever compare value by some module. The value is of your knowledge in particular module.\n\nI think, adding couple of more modules in will value more. like PM or PP\n\nThanks\nYatin
723266
I think there are better places than this to find this answer... maybe in your management theory book?
551933
THe hypothesis is your own idea of why. Students needing to work full time, support a family and carry a full workload in a demanding, competitive world could be one.\nDependent could be competitiveness, while independent could be environmental circumstances.
407599
It is not a competitive advantage any longer. It is a matter of survival. The competitive advantage ended in the 70's. A modern enterprise can not be properly managed or run without an information system. The days of the rooms full of people with green eye shades is over.  Even individuals rely on information systems today. Quicken, MS Money, spread sheets. I have a gross of spread sheets. \n\nLet us take for example of just one business, the grocery store. Actually, today it is called the supermarket.  30 years ago, they had scores of clerks stamping prices on cans of beans, etc. Then they had scores of clerks keying those prices into cash resisters and other scores of clerks going through the isles trying to determine what they needed to restock. Then they had scores of clerks typing up purchase orders for more beans. Informations systems have eliminated all of that. The bar code on the product, tells the information system the product that was just bought. The information system calculates the price, deducts the item from inventory, and checks against the reorder point, and if that is reached issues an order for more of that item from the vendor and transmits the order to the vendors computer. \n\nDo you think that a company such as Walmart could even exist today without information systems?
264997
Read Maynard Smiths 'Evolution and the theory of games'
775364
There are no real advantages, only perceived ones! \n\nThere isn't enough space to list all of the disadvantages.\n\nIf some one was to do an honest cost/benefit analysis, very few would own one.
601657
Let me tell you a story about anecdotal evidence.  I had this friend who always supported his arguments with anecdotal evidence, and one day I took him to task for it, by presenting him with statistical data that completely demolished his hunches.  :^)
390797
Advantage:\nYou make lots of money\n\nDisadvantage:\nYou have to be a prick
384233
Check out the Analytic Hierarchy Process.  It allows you to score your priorities based on categories you designate.  It's a very scientific way to make multivariate decisions.  Sometimes it helps to score priorities in groups to offset subjectivity.
611888
The link below is a pretty good analyzes of the two with out favoring one or the other.  It was written in a method that even I can understand so you should be fine ;-)
1007588
Human nature.. \n\nwe are naturally competitive.. basically comes down to power and security.. you can never have enough \n\nmore money, more stuff, more power, more security
884057
Comparability is achieved when there is uniformity in the financial reports of different companies (escpecially from the same industry)  which enables a user to form an opinion based solely on those reports without further calculations or information. \n\nPrinciples-based standards do lead to more than one valid interpretation and lead to a decreased comparability superficially. For example, different depreciation methods and revaluation methods could be argued to make the assets value of a company irrelevant when compared to another company because both values have been worked out differently. \n\nHowever, principles-based standards are based on an intrinsic accounting principle, and if applied correctly and appropriately by firms could increase comparability at a more deeper/intrinsic level. \n\nLet's say there are two companies which use the same depreciation methods and therefore we could assume that their asset values are comparable. It turns out that one company is understating its depreciation expense and the profit figure is subsequently overstated. In this case the both the profit figures and the assets figures for both companies are not comparable because they are not both true and fair -- one of them has been overstated. \n\nThat's my understanding of comparability and principles-based standards. Hope it helps.
364028
Richard Bellman made this principle in regards to a two-stage optimization to get V(t+s, x, φ)\n\n   Using any U up to a time t, with a controller U changes to an optimal one.   At time t+s we get a performance J(t,x,V(s,∙,φ),U).  If you take the supremum with respect to U you get V(t+s, x, φ)