Explain why the game of economics has no winner.?

Answer this question

  • Explain why the game of economics has no winner.?


Answer #1 | 26/02 2017 05:41
There are two kinds of economics, positive and normative. Positive economics deals with econ as it is without offering any value judgment. For instance, if I were to say that the unemployment rate in England is higher than that of the U.S. I would be making a positive economic statement (assuming that's true) because I'm stating something that could be proven empirically. However, if I were to say that England should invest in worker reeducation programs in order to retrain workers that have been displaced by technology and make them more productive and viable factors in the labor force, then I would be stating an opinion. That's where the trick is, generally politicians, economists, pundits and the like can't argue with empirically shown mathematically proven evidence, however they can disagree on the interpretation of those facts and the proper way to proceed with the given evidence. That's basically why there are no winners.
Answer #2 | 23/02 2017 17:20
It depends

Possible answer

Who are the winners and losers? The first winner is the ... and only four-fifths of shale reserves are economic to extract using ... Game theory; Graphic ...
Read more
It is implied that the prisoners will have no ... iterated, version of the game. It has, ... the continuous prisoner's dilemma may help explain why ...
Read more
... had the characteristics of a game, including strategies, winners ... game theory has since expanded in ... game theory from an economic ...
Read more
... , those who hope to use game theory to explain strategic ... For readers new to economics, game ... To such entities game theory has no application in the ...
Read more

Show more results