Maybe this post should be titled "Erratum" or "corrigendum". I have an example in my paper last year in which wage frontiers are supposed to vary with two parameters. One is the markup in the "iron" industry. And the other is σ t. The example should be as in Table 1. All the theory and the visualizations in the paper work out with this example. Table 1: Technology for Producing Steel and Corn InputIndustryIronCornAlphaBetaLabora0,1 = 1aα,0,2(t) = (5191/5770) e(1/10) - σ taβ,0,2 = 305/494Irona1,1 = 9/20aα,1,2(t) = (1/40) e(1/10) - σ taβ,1,2 = 3/1976Corna2,1 = 2aα,2,2(t) = (1/10) e(1/10) - σ taβ,2,2 = 229/494 Vienneau, Robert L. 2019. Structural economic dynamics, markups, real Wicksell effects, and the reverse substitution of labor. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 50: 216-226.
Topics:
Robert Vienneau considers the following as important: Example in Mathematical Economics, Sraffa Effects
This could be interesting, too:
Robert Vienneau writes The Production Of Commodities And The Structure Of Production: An Example
Robert Vienneau writes A Derivation Of Prices Of Production With Linear Programming
Robert Vienneau writes Reswitching Pattern In Corn-Tractor Model
Robert Vienneau writes Goal: Perturb Special Case Of Steedman’s Corn-Tractor Model
Maybe this post should be titled "Erratum" or "corrigendum". I have an example in my paper last year in which wage frontiers are supposed to vary with two parameters. One is the markup in the "iron" industry. And the other is σ t. The example should be as in Table 1. All the theory and the visualizations in the paper work out with this example.
Input | Industry | ||
Iron | Corn | ||
Alpha | Beta | ||
Labor | a0,1 = 1 | aα,0,2(t) = (5191/5770) e(1/10) - σ t | aβ,0,2 = 305/494 |
Iron | a1,1 = 9/20 | aα,1,2(t) = (1/40) e(1/10) - σ t | aβ,1,2 = 3/1976 |
Corn | a2,1 = 2 | aα,2,2(t) = (1/10) e(1/10) - σ t | aβ,2,2 = 229/494 |
- Vienneau, Robert L. 2019. Structural economic dynamics, markups, real Wicksell effects, and the reverse substitution of labor. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics 50: 216-226.