Abstract
This paper submits that one of the most fallacious paradigms in economic thought and policy, stemming from Ricardo, has been that of comparative advantage, as it has assumed no capital mobility whereas it has been mainly foreign direct investment that has driven global trade since World War II and has confirmed Marx's claims for uneven development. The paper outlines that this has meant asymmetric outcomes compromising the post-war Bretton Woods system and suggests that this needs both a post-Ricardian and a post-Keynesian conceptual framework for global governance.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
