Understanding how an economy works
Explaining the concept of an economy to middle school students and high school students.
Introduction
Whether you’re a student, parent of a student, or a social studies teacher, you’ve likely heard the term "economy" a million times over. But what does it really mean? In this blog post, we’ll provide an overview of the concept of an economy and explain how it works in simple terms. Read on to learn more!
What is an economy?
An economy is simply the way in which goods and services are produced and made available to people. It consists of all the activities related to creating, buying, and selling products and services. To understand how an economy works, it helps to think of it as a system with multiple parts working together. The parts that make up an economy include production (making goods and providing services), consumption (buying and using goods and services), exchange (trading goods/services for money or other forms of value), investment (putting money into businesses or markets with the goal of making more money), and taxation (units of government collecting taxes from individuals and businesses).
The four pillars of an economy
Economists break down economies into four pillars: capital (or wealth), labor (or the people who do the work), technology, and entrepreneurship. Capital includes not only money, but also buildings, equipment, natural resources, land, tools, investments - anything that can be used to produce goods or services. Labor refers to people who do the actual work necessary for production; these may be laborers, scientists, engineers, entrepreneurs - anyone and everyone who puts their skills to use for economic purposes. Technology is anything that helps us produce goods or services faster or better than before; this could be anything from simpler manual machines on up to computers and robots that fully automate certain tasks. Last but not least is entrepreneurship - this refers to those who create new businesses or come up with new ideas for products/services that have potential economic value.
Conclusion
It’s easy to see why understanding the concept of an economy is important when talking about economic development at home or abroad. By understanding how economies work on both micro- and macro-levels - from individual households making purchasing decisions based on income levels all the way up through international trade agreements - we can gain insight into what makes our global economic system tick. So if you want your middle school students or high school students to get ahead in their social studies classes this year - and beyond - make sure you explain the concept of an economy clearly and concisely!
Showing posts with label Organizational science. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Organizational science. Show all posts
Friday, March 10, 2023
Wednesday, April 15, 2020
Paul Spiegelman
I recently came across a piece written by Paul Spiegelman for Forbes.com, and I'd like to share it here with you. Published just a little over a couple weeks ago, on March 27, it's entitled, "What It Means To Be A Leader Right Now". In this time of great uncertainty and anxiety, his words here remind us what's really important in life and work. I invite you to check it out when you have some time. It's a great read. Paul's been writing for Forbes.com for some time now, and it's always a pleasure to take in his insights whenever I have a chance.
I had the opportunity to interview Paul five years ago, at the beginning of 2015. At the time, he was serving as chief culture officer at Stericycle Inc., my former employer. You can read that interview here: Exclusive Interview: Paul Spiegelman, Best-Selling Author and Culture Executive.
From his bio on Forbes.com:
I had the opportunity to interview Paul five years ago, at the beginning of 2015. At the time, he was serving as chief culture officer at Stericycle Inc., my former employer. You can read that interview here: Exclusive Interview: Paul Spiegelman, Best-Selling Author and Culture Executive.
From his bio on Forbes.com:
Paul Spiegelman is the co-founder of the Small Giants Community, an organization dedicated to identifying, connecting, and developing purpose-driven business leaders. He is the former chief culture officer of Stericycle, the co-founder and former CEO of BerylHealth and the founder and chairman of The Beryl Institute. Paul is a New York Times best-selling author and has been honored with the Ernst & Young Entrepreneur of the Year award. Paul is a sought-after speaker and author on leadership, employee engagement, entrepreneurship, culture, and leading a purpose-driven life. He has made many radio and TV appearances and his views have been featured in the Wall Street Journal, Inc. Magazine, and he is currently a columnist for Forbes.com. Paul practiced law for two years prior to starting BerylHealth. He holds a bachelor’s degree in history from UCLA and a law degree from Southwestern University. You can read more about Paul at www.paulspiegelman.com.
Friday, March 27, 2020
Labor-Management relationship
A look at the relationship between labor and management from a sociological and philosophical perspective.
Aaron S. Robertson
Labor has always needed management/ownership. It is management that creates the conditions and sets the tone that leads to the various economic opportunities available to a society through the processes and activities of vision and foresight, identifying market need, planning, organization, staffing, procurement, and negotiation. Not everyone can be in management, nor does everyone wish to be in management. Management is simply not for everyone.
Management/ownership has always needed labor, but in different ways at different times in different eras. In the nineteenth and well into the twentieth centuries, much of the labor force needed by management came in the form of sheer physical strength and an ability to endure endless repetition fit for an environment of manufacturing and heavy industry. During this period, labor was arguably more disposable – a worker could easily be replaced, if necessary, and for any reason, by another worker with similar physical endurance. Labor was not required to think much or deviate from what were often mundane, repetitive tasks. There simply was no need to.
As the linear line of natural time and evolutionary progress went on, a combination of labor unions, public outrage, and a variety of laws and regulations sprung up to put a damper on runaway practices by management – child labor was eliminated; trusts were broken up; safety and environmental concerns addressed; the standard eight-hour workday put into place; fairer wages and hiring processes implemented. Technology naturally improved and became more readily available, helping to make manufacturing processes less physically-intensive for labor and more economical for management/ownership. New industries and professional fields emerged. More and more in labor’s ranks began pursuing higher education as it became easier to access. All these factors, combined, created the conditions for a thriving middle class and a better-equipped consumer.
Now well under way in the twenty-first century and in an era of information and innovation often referred to as “the knowledge economy,” management/ownership needs labor for another reason – their mental strength and ability. Again, this is all in accordance with the linear line of natural time and progress. While it was arguably easier for management to quickly replace a worker in the previous period with someone of comparable physical strength and ability, it is arguably more difficult for management today to find a replacement with the ideal mix of comparable, ready-to-go intellectual capability, talents, interests, skills, and practical experience. With the variables no longer confined to sheer physical metrics, coupled with a strong emphasis on the need for knowledge in an ever-complex economy, each worker today is truly unique – truly differentiated from everyone else – because each mind is truly unique.
Management has also always been dependent on labor in the sense that managers come from the ranks of labor. Put another way, labor provides and stocks the pipeline of managerial candidates, serving as the sole source of fuel. This holds true whether a particular manager in question has come from the ranks of labor within his or her own work organization at the time – the concept of promoting from within – or if the manager has joined his or her current organization after immediately coming from labor at a prior organization. Even if the manager has come to his or her current organization from a previous one as a manager, the lineage of his or her time spent within the ranks of labor can be traced back to some earlier point in his or her career. One does not enter the ranks of management without ever first spending time in the ranks of labor.
With this context established, then, that management is, and always has been, reliant on labor, and vice-versa, the dialogue for the conversation of a strong organizational culture backed by high levels of employee engagement and abundant professional development opportunities becomes more apparent and easier to have.
Aaron S. Robertson
Labor has always needed management/ownership. It is management that creates the conditions and sets the tone that leads to the various economic opportunities available to a society through the processes and activities of vision and foresight, identifying market need, planning, organization, staffing, procurement, and negotiation. Not everyone can be in management, nor does everyone wish to be in management. Management is simply not for everyone.
Management/ownership has always needed labor, but in different ways at different times in different eras. In the nineteenth and well into the twentieth centuries, much of the labor force needed by management came in the form of sheer physical strength and an ability to endure endless repetition fit for an environment of manufacturing and heavy industry. During this period, labor was arguably more disposable – a worker could easily be replaced, if necessary, and for any reason, by another worker with similar physical endurance. Labor was not required to think much or deviate from what were often mundane, repetitive tasks. There simply was no need to.
As the linear line of natural time and evolutionary progress went on, a combination of labor unions, public outrage, and a variety of laws and regulations sprung up to put a damper on runaway practices by management – child labor was eliminated; trusts were broken up; safety and environmental concerns addressed; the standard eight-hour workday put into place; fairer wages and hiring processes implemented. Technology naturally improved and became more readily available, helping to make manufacturing processes less physically-intensive for labor and more economical for management/ownership. New industries and professional fields emerged. More and more in labor’s ranks began pursuing higher education as it became easier to access. All these factors, combined, created the conditions for a thriving middle class and a better-equipped consumer.
Now well under way in the twenty-first century and in an era of information and innovation often referred to as “the knowledge economy,” management/ownership needs labor for another reason – their mental strength and ability. Again, this is all in accordance with the linear line of natural time and progress. While it was arguably easier for management to quickly replace a worker in the previous period with someone of comparable physical strength and ability, it is arguably more difficult for management today to find a replacement with the ideal mix of comparable, ready-to-go intellectual capability, talents, interests, skills, and practical experience. With the variables no longer confined to sheer physical metrics, coupled with a strong emphasis on the need for knowledge in an ever-complex economy, each worker today is truly unique – truly differentiated from everyone else – because each mind is truly unique.
Management has also always been dependent on labor in the sense that managers come from the ranks of labor. Put another way, labor provides and stocks the pipeline of managerial candidates, serving as the sole source of fuel. This holds true whether a particular manager in question has come from the ranks of labor within his or her own work organization at the time – the concept of promoting from within – or if the manager has joined his or her current organization after immediately coming from labor at a prior organization. Even if the manager has come to his or her current organization from a previous one as a manager, the lineage of his or her time spent within the ranks of labor can be traced back to some earlier point in his or her career. One does not enter the ranks of management without ever first spending time in the ranks of labor.
With this context established, then, that management is, and always has been, reliant on labor, and vice-versa, the dialogue for the conversation of a strong organizational culture backed by high levels of employee engagement and abundant professional development opportunities becomes more apparent and easier to have.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)