The concept of "creative destruction" by Joseph Schumpeter. The well-known Austrian economist Joseph Schumpeter called the mechanism of the market crowding out old technologies and replacing them with new ones "the system of the creative. The well-known Austrian economist Schumpeter called
by the "system of creative destruction". Think why.
century. From this point of view, our century can also be defined as the century of globalization. Therefore, the lessons of the 20th century are especially significant and important for understanding its prospects.
Historians and politicians will argue for a long time about the richest heritage of the outgoing century, but its ideological and political results are unlikely to be revised in the foreseeable future. In short, they boil down to the following: human rights are fundamental, democracy is stronger than tyranny, the market is more efficient than the command economy, openness is better than self-isolation. This system of values and attitudes, the creator and active propagandist of which was historically the West, has become widespread and recognized in modern world... For the first time in history, the vast majority of people living on Earth are gradually developing a common understanding of the basic principles of life.
Like a hundred and two hundred years ago, the end of the century was marked by a new scientific and technological revolution. Intelligence, knowledge, technology are becoming the most important economic assets. In the advanced countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, more than half of the gross domestic product is generated in intellectually intensive production. The information revolution, based on the connection of a computer with telecommunication networks, is fundamentally transforming human existence. It compresses time and space, opens borders, allows you to establish contacts anywhere in the world. It turns individuals into citizens of the world ...
Among the impressive set of problems requiring the joining of efforts of the inhabitants of the Earth, in the first place, undoubtedly, is the state the environment... Today it is so alarming that the survival of mankind as a highly developed, civilized community is questionable. The situation is aggravated by the large inertia of the processes in the biosphere. Stopping and reversing destructive trends takes many years to mobilize enormous resources.
The unprecedented intensity of ties between people, individual groups, nations, states, civilizations makes individuals humanity, opens up the universal space for the forces of good and evil. Globalization is undermining the foundations of “insular consciousness”. With all the desire in the Modern world, it is impossible for a long time, and even more so forever, to be isolated from global problems... If the world becomes interdependent, then it means that it is also mutually vulnerable.
(V. Kuvaldin)
C 2. What ideological and political results of the XX century did the author give? Name any four. What is the term social scientists call the implementation process new system values that have developed by the XX century.?
C4. Based on the content of the text, explain the term "insular consciousness" used by the author. Based on the text, knowledge of the course and facts of social life, give two manifestations of "insular consciousness" in the modern world.
C 5. What is the meaning of social scientists in the concept of "interpersonal relations"? Drawing on your knowledge of your social studies course, compose two sentences containing information about interpersonal relationships.
C 6. Each person in his life is faced with economic phenomena that have a noticeable impact on him. Give three examples of influence economic phenomena on a person's life.
1) What role does the economy play in the life of society? What is its relationship with other spheres of public life? 2) What are the main signsmarket economy. What are her strengths and weak sides? Than modern market economy different from the free market?
3) Why is the way and the offer called the regulating mechanisms of the market?
4) Explain why many economists consider a mixed economy to be optimal, not a command or a free market.
5) What forms of ownership do you know?
6) List the functions of money in the economy.
Document Fragment from the essay of Academician D. S. Likhachev "Notes on Russian."cultural monuments. Their losses are irreparable, because cultural monuments are always individual, always associated with a certain era, with certain masters. Each monument is destroyed forever, distorted forever, wounded forever. The "stock" of cultural monuments, the "stock" of the cultural environment is extremely limited in the world, and it is being depleted at an all-progressive rate. Technique, which itself is a product of culture, sometimes serves more to mortify culture than to prolong its life. Bulldozers, excavators, construction cranes, driven by thoughtless, ignorant people, destroy both that which has not yet been discovered in the earth, and that which is above the earth, which has already served people. Even the restorers themselves ... sometimes become more destroyers than guardians of the monuments of the past. Monuments and city planners are destroying, especially if they do not have clear and complete historical knowledge. The land becomes cramped for cultural monuments, not because there is little land, but because builders are attracted to old places that are inhabited and therefore seem especially beautiful and tempting for city planners ... , only platonic love for one's country is not enough, love must be effective. Questions and Assignments for the document Identify what the main idea of this passage is. Explain why the loss of cultural heritage is irreparable. How do you understand the author's expression "moral settledness"? Remember the content of the paragraph and explain reasonably why it is necessary to preserve cultural monuments. What cultural mechanisms are involved in these processes? Find examples of barbaric attitudes towards cultural monuments.
I beg you, help with the document on social studies, grade 10. I would have done it myself, but I don’t understand anything. For they asked 6 documents, help at least withone please!)
Document:
From the work of modern Russian scientists-economists "Market and social harmony".
According to universal historical standards, the market mechanism cannot be considered as a completely ideal form. More and more often, researchers note in this context the so-called "market imperfection" associated with very problematic market opportunities in achieving fair distribution and use of resources on Earth, ensuring environmental sustainability, eliminating unjustified social inequality. According to the UN, the absolute dimensions of poverty in the world are increasing: an estimated 20% of the world's poorest strata accounted for only 4% of the world's wealth in the mid-1980s. Apparently, the future of the world economy should be associated with a more complex economic mechanism than the actual mechanism of the market.In this mechanism, an increasing role will belong, along with the relations of market exchange, to a variety of more subtle mechanisms that presuppose the achievement of social agreement between the multitude of subjects of socio-economic relations.
Questions and tasks:
1) Why do the authors of the document characterize the market mechanism for regulating the economy as imperfect?
2) What data confirm the deepening in the world social inequality?
3) Using the content of the paragraph, suggest possible (besides market exchange) mechanisms for achieving social agreement between participants in socio-economic relations. (If not difficult, find an electronic version of the textbook on the Internet, class 10-Bogolyubov, Lazebnikova, paragraph 12)
In his opinion, traditional economic theories describing the economy in more or less unchanging conditions (the same means of production, products, etc.) should be supplemented by an analysis of dynamic processes, between equilibrium states, for example, during the transition to the release of substantially new products.
He wrote: “Strictly speaking, […] revolutions do not occur continuously, but discretely and are separated from each other by phases of relative calm. But the whole process as a whole is really continuous, that is, in each this moment there is either a revolution or the assimilation of its results. Both of these phases, taken together, form the so-called economic cycle. "
Joseph Schumpeter, Economic Development Theory. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, Eksmo, 2007, p. 461.
"Economist Joseph Schumpeter came up with the term "Creative destruction" to describe the life and death cycle of companies. In the last generation, this phenomenon has grown exponentially. Just fifty years ago, most American companies could hold out on the list of enterprises, on the basis of which Standard & Poor's calculates the S&P 500 index for about sixty-five years on average. Today they drop out of there in ten years. new models every two years, then every year, then every six months, and now almost constantly. Indeed, products are modified in response to every change in the tastes of the public. People are changing profession and lifestyle like never before. Ideas are becoming more and more fashionable. and instantly lose popularity Do you remember the days when factories were built of bricks and banks were made of granite and marble? These days factories are pre-designed, corporate offices have no walls, and banks - well, many banks (and stock markets) - no longer need physical space. They survive perfectly in virtual world... So the river does flow continuously, but much faster than Heraclitus could imagine ... "
Luc de Brabander, The Forgotten Side of Change. The art of creating innovations, M., "Pretext", 2008, pp. 17-19.
“It is important to understand that when we talk about capitalism we are dealing with an evolutionary process. It seems strange that someone can fail to notice such an obvious fact, the importance of which has long been emphasized Karl Marx... However, the fragmentary analysis from which we draw most of our conclusions about the functioning of modern capitalism stubbornly ignores it. Let us explain what has been said and see what significance this has from the point of view of our problem. Capitalism, by its very essence, is a form or method of economic change; it never is and cannot be a stationary state. The evolutionary character of the capitalist process is explained not only by the fact that economic life takes place in a social and natural environment that changes and thereby changes the parameters under which economic actions are performed. This fact is very important, and these changes (wars, revolutions, etc.) often affect changes in the economy, but are not the primary sources of these changes. The same can be said for the quasi-automatic growth of population and capital, and the quirks of monetary policy. The main impulse that sets the capitalist mechanism in motion and keeps it running comes from new consumer goods, new methods of production and transportation of goods, new markets and new forms. economic organization who create capitalist enterprises. […] The opening up of new markets, internal and external, and the development of economic organization from craft shops and factories to concerns such as USSteel, illustrate the same process of economic mutation - if a biological term can be used here - that is continuously revolutionizing the economic structure from within. destroying old structure and creating a new one. This process of "creative destruction" is the very essence of capitalism, within its framework every capitalist concern has to exist. This fact has a twofold relationship to our problem.
First, since we are dealing with a process, each element of which takes a significant amount of time in order to determine its main features and final consequences, it makes no sense to assess the results of this process at a given point in time: we must do this over a period consisting of centuries and decades. Any system - not just an economic one - that fully uses all its capabilities to obtain the best result at any given moment in time, can in the long term give way to a system that never does this, since short-term advantages can turn into long-term weaknesses.
Secondly, since we are dealing with an organic process, an analysis of what is happening in a particular concern or industry can clarify how the individual details of the entire mechanism work, but nothing more. The behavior of an enterprise should be assessed only against the background of the overall process, in the context of the situation generated by it. It is necessary to clarify its role in the constant stream of "creative destruction", it is impossible to understand it outside this stream or on the basis of the hypothesis of the immobility of the world. "
Joseph Schumpeter, Economic Development Theory. Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, Eksmo, 2007, p. 460-461.
Term coined by an Austrian economist Joseph Schumpeter, which called the mechanism that cleans the economy of all obsolete, "creative destruction."
The economy lives and develops, Schumpeter argued, thanks to the destruction of old companies, methods and ideas, which are replaced by new, more productive and profitable ones.
EXAMPLE.“What happens to an economy in which purification mechanisms have been artificially turned off is shown by the recent experience of Japan. A recent article by Ricardo Caballero, Takeo Hoshi and Anil Kashyap in the prestigious American Economic Review describes how trying to keep bankrupt companies afloat has turned the Japanese economy into a lost decade of growth. Let us recall the history of the Japanese crisis. The country's economy has been growing steadily for three decades. During the incredible real estate boom in the mid-1980s, land under the imperial palace in Japan was worth more than all land in California. But the bubble burst, and the country plunged into stagnation for a decade. The main question is: why did the stagnation last so long? And why did banks continue to lend to companies with light hand economists nicknamed "zombies"? One of the reasons lies on the surface. Banks were reluctant to admit their mistakes. After all, if non-viable borrowers stopped paying their debts, banks would have to significantly increase reserves for problem loans. And this is not only unprofitable, since it means a decrease in profits, but also dangerous, since it is fraught with the collapse of the bank itself. Therefore, lenders supported a semblance of life in half-dead companies - often they were given loans, so that they could pay interest. The second reason is pressure on banks from the state. The economic policy was aimed at preventing bankruptcies and supporting small and medium-sized businesses through bank loans. Japan has long managed to keep potential bankrupts afloat. But at what cost? At the beginning of 2000, such zombies were 30% Japanese companies who owned 15% of all assets in the economy. Zombie populations grew the most in industries where there was little competition from foreign companies: in construction, trade and services. In these sectors, the number of jobs has not declined as much as in the less secure industry. But fewer new jobs were created in them. Another negative effect of Japanese-style government support is a slowdown in productivity growth. Industries in which the number of zombies increased by five percentage points increased productivity by an average of 2% per year, and where the number of nonviable firms jumped 20 points, productivity fell by 5%. Bank and government support for weak companies has slowed efficiency gains and suppressed the Schumpeterian forces of creative destruction. It is important to understand that zombies, by their very existence, impede the development of healthy companies.... It is no coincidence that in those sectors of the Japanese economy where employment was provided artificially, fewer jobs were created than where banks and the state did not consider it necessary to maintain greenhouse conditions. Zombies pulled away from the market not only financial resources, but also qualified personnel, keeping ineffectively high wages... For example, a normal real estate development company could hire a third more employees if it were not for the additional demand for workers from zombie employers. If Japan did not prevent the bankruptcy of non-viable companies, the level of investment in various industries, according to the calculations of Caballero et al., Could be higher by 4-36% per year. Unsurprisingly, in the 1990s, the Japanese economy grew by only 0.5% per year (in the United States, the average growth during this period was 2.6% per year). […]
Schumpeter's theory also has a lesson for Russia. In Soviet times, the mechanism of competition and creative destruction was almost completely turned off, and it is this mechanism that provides about half of the long-term productivity growth. Entrepreneurial activity, the main engine of technological progress, was “rewarded” with imprisonment. The result is known: the complete non-competitiveness of the manufacturing industry, Agriculture, underdevelopment of the service sector. But the 1998 crisis showed that, without government intervention, the economy is able to quickly return to the trajectory of dynamic growth. Now the state has much more financial resources... This is not only an opportunity, but also a temptation: to distribute money to the largest and most influential companies, to help domestic producers with higher tariffs, to force companies to maintain excess employment. But politicians must remember: this is the road to nowhere. If Russia wants to get out of the crisis faster and increase its weight in the world, creative destruction should not be contained, but encouraged. "
Tsyvinsky O., Destruction as creativity, Forbes magazine, January 2009, p. 74-75.