Talk:Economic efficiency

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Economics (Rated Start-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Intro needs to be changed[edit]

The introduction needs work, as it appears below, it does not concur with the standard use of the term efficiency in economics. --lk (talk) 09:28, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Economic efficiency is a general term for the value assigned to a situation by some measure designed to capture the amount of waste or "friction" or other undesirable economic features present. The term microeconomic reform refers to any policy designed to increase economic efficiency.

The phrase "The efficiency of an economy is used to determine how well an economic system serves society." is not appropriate. "How well an economic system Italic textservices societyItalic text is a normative goal. It is true that some do use the concept to make a judgement about "the service" to the society, but it implies a political goal. MH —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 03:57, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Pyat rublei 1997.jpg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Pyat rublei 1997.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 11:26, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

…Knowing the Value of The Dollar and exactly what Backs and or Represents the Dollar would be an evaluational effort towards economic efficiencyDavid George DeLancey (talk) 21:40, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

First Assumption Is Either Trivial or Inane[edit]

"No one can be made better off without making someone else worse off"

Opportunity cost makes this a universal rule. When you use a resource for one thing, you cannot use it for another. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 16:39, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

This sounds like a comment from someone who either never took a principles of econ course, or took a very inadequate one. I recommend that this article be edited primarily by people with PhDs in the subject. Hermitage (talk) 05:26, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

opening sentence still really wrong; I deleted it[edit]

This article started with the following sentence: "Economic efficiency is the use of resources so as to maximize the production of goods and services."

With a reference to some book by Arthur O' Sullivan -- perhaps a lesser-known textbook for econ principles courses?

Anyway, this is really not correct. I teach economics at the college level, and I don't like the idea of my students reading this definition. For example, it is possible for an increase in leisure time to cause a decrease in the production of goods and services, but still increase efficiency. For example, if I voluntarily cut back my work hours from 40 to 35, and accept a pay cut from my employer that leaves their profit unchanged overall, this can be a Pareto improvement because I am made better off and no one is made worse off.

Better is probably to just start with the definition of Pareto efficiency and go from there. I'd look at how efficiency is defined in one of the more mainstream principles texts, like Krugman, or Mankiw, or Frank. I can come back to this at some point, but I don't have time to re-write the article at the moment. For now I just wanted to delete the opening sentence which was very wrong and misleading. Hermitage (talk) 05:24, 5 November 2014 (UTC)