CLAT Exam  >  CLAT Questions  >  Direction: Read the following passage careful... Start Learning for Free
Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:
Richard Goodwin, the well-known American economist who taught at Harvard before migrating to Cambridge, England, because of the McCarthyite witch-hunt of the 1950s, and who, although a Marxist, did some simulations on a model of a capitalist economy. The economy in the model experienced a wave of innovations while output was determined by aggregate demand; and the simulation results showed that unless wages increased significantly because of the introduction of innovations, output and employment at the end of the wave would be lower than at the beginning. There is no reason, however, for such a rise in wages despite the rise in labour productivity because the rise in unemployment through which alone such a rise in labour productivity manifests itself would weaken workers’ bargaining strength for enforcing higher wages. The conclusion about technological change causing economic retrogression in such a capitalist economy therefore remains unaffected.
Capitalist economies, however, have not actually seen economic retrogression as a consequence of technological change. The question arises: why not? If as technological change is introduced and there is a simultaneous increase in aggregate demand for some independent reason, then there need not be either a decline in employment or output in the economy introducing such a change. But there is no reason why such an increase should occur within the capitalist sector. It will have to come from outside, and not just as a coincidence; the capitalist sector must cause such an independent expansion in aggregate demand to happen. In short, it will need to have a ‘market on tap’ existing outside of it that it can turn to to prevent a decline in output and employment. This idea, originally advanced by Rosa Luxemburg, has been borne out in practice. Capitalism has generally had such a ‘market on tap’ (a phrase of the economic historian, S.B. Saul), which is why technological change under it has been accompanied not by economic retrogression but by economic progress. [Extracted with edits and revision from ‘Flawed Idea Innovation and Retrogression’ by Prabhat Patnaik, Telegraph India]
Q. What is a compelling explanation for the lack of wage increases in a capitalist market structure despite improvements in labor productivity?
  • a)
    External factors play a role in causing wage stagnation.
  • b)
    Wage levels are not connected to labor productivity.
  • c)
    Capitalism relies on the principles of supply and demand.
  • d)
    Increasing unemployment reduces workers' bargaining power.
Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Most Upvoted Answer
Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questio...
The argument posits that when labor productivity increases in a capitalist market, one would expect a significant increase in wages. However, this is not the case in reality, as wages remain stagnant in capitalism. On the contrary, when labor productivity rises, there is a notable increase in unemployment, which subsequently diminishes the bargaining power of workers. Option D aligns with this argument.
Options A, B, and C do not directly relate to the provided reasoning and can be dismissed as potential answers.
Therefore, option D is the correct response.
Attention CLAT Students!
To make sure you are not studying endlessly, EduRev has designed CLAT study material, with Structured Courses, Videos, & Test Series. Plus get personalized analysis, doubt solving and improvement plans to achieve a great score in CLAT.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Similar CLAT Doubts

Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:Richard Goodwin, the well-known American economist who taught at Harvard before migrating to Cambridge, England, because of the McCarthyite witch-hunt of the 1950s, and who, although a Marxist, did some simulations on a model of a capitalist economy. The economy in the model experienced a wave of innovations while output was determined by aggregate demand; and the simulation results showed that unless wages increased significantly because of the introduction of innovations, output and employment at the end of the wave would be lower than at the beginning. There is no reason, however, for such a rise in wages despite the rise in labour productivity because the rise in unemployment through which alone such a rise in labour productivity manifests itself would weaken workers’ bargaining strength for enforcing higher wages. The conclusion about technological change causing economic retrogression in such a capitalist economy therefore remains unaffected.Capitalist economies, however, have not actually seen economic retrogression as a consequence of technological change. The question arises: why not? If as technological change is introduced and there is a simultaneous increase in aggregate demand for some independent reason, then there need not be either a decline in employment or output in the economy introducing such a change. But there is no reason why such an increase should occur within the capitalist sector. It will have to come from outside, and not just as a coincidence; the capitalist sector must cause such an independent expansion in aggregate demand to happen. In short, it will need to have a ‘market on tap’ existing outside of it that it can turn to to prevent a decline in output and employment. This idea, originally advanced by Rosa Luxemburg, has been borne out in practice. Capitalism has generally had such a ‘market on tap’ (a phrase of the economic historian, S.B. Saul), which is why technological change under it has been accompanied not by economic retrogression but by economic progress. [Extracted with edits and revision from ‘Flawed Idea Innovation and Retrogression’ by Prabhat Patnaik, Telegraph India]Q.Why does the passage suggest that capitalist economies have not experienced economic retrogression due to technological change?

Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:Richard Goodwin, the well-known American economist who taught at Harvard before migrating to Cambridge, England, because of the McCarthyite witch-hunt of the 1950s, and who, although a Marxist, did some simulations on a model of a capitalist economy. The economy in the model experienced a wave of innovations while output was determined by aggregate demand; and the simulation results showed that unless wages increased significantly because of the introduction of innovations, output and employment at the end of the wave would be lower than at the beginning. There is no reason, however, for such a rise in wages despite the rise in labour productivity because the rise in unemployment through which alone such a rise in labour productivity manifests itself would weaken workers’ bargaining strength for enforcing higher wages. The conclusion about technological change causing economic retrogression in such a capitalist economy therefore remains unaffected.Capitalist economies, however, have not actually seen economic retrogression as a consequence of technological change. The question arises: why not? If as technological change is introduced and there is a simultaneous increase in aggregate demand for some independent reason, then there need not be either a decline in employment or output in the economy introducing such a change. But there is no reason why such an increase should occur within the capitalist sector. It will have to come from outside, and not just as a coincidence; the capitalist sector must cause such an independent expansion in aggregate demand to happen. In short, it will need to have a ‘market on tap’ existing outside of it that it can turn to to prevent a decline in output and employment. This idea, originally advanced by Rosa Luxemburg, has been borne out in practice. Capitalism has generally had such a ‘market on tap’ (a phrase of the economic historian, S.B. Saul), which is why technological change under it has been accompanied not by economic retrogression but by economic progress. [Extracted with edits and revision from ‘Flawed Idea Innovation and Retrogression’ by Prabhat Patnaik, Telegraph India]Q.Which of the following statements best supports the claim that, when technological revolution occurs, the capitalist sector must independently trigger an increase in aggregate demand?

Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:Richard Goodwin, the well-known American economist who taught at Harvard before migrating to Cambridge, England, because of the McCarthyite witch-hunt of the 1950s, and who, although a Marxist, did some simulations on a model of a capitalist economy. The economy in the model experienced a wave of innovations while output was determined by aggregate demand; and the simulation results showed that unless wages increased significantly because of the introduction of innovations, output and employment at the end of the wave would be lower than at the beginning. There is no reason, however, for such a rise in wages despite the rise in labour productivity because the rise in unemployment through which alone such a rise in labour productivity manifests itself would weaken workers’ bargaining strength for enforcing higher wages. The conclusion about technological change causing economic retrogression in such a capitalist economy therefore remains unaffected.Capitalist economies, however, have not actually seen economic retrogression as a consequence of technological change. The question arises: why not? If as technological change is introduced and there is a simultaneous increase in aggregate demand for some independent reason, then there need not be either a decline in employment or output in the economy introducing such a change. But there is no reason why such an increase should occur within the capitalist sector. It will have to come from outside, and not just as a coincidence; the capitalist sector must cause such an independent expansion in aggregate demand to happen. In short, it will need to have a ‘market on tap’ existing outside of it that it can turn to to prevent a decline in output and employment. This idea, originally advanced by Rosa Luxemburg, has been borne out in practice. Capitalism has generally had such a ‘market on tap’ (a phrase of the economic historian, S.B. Saul), which is why technological change under it has been accompanied not by economic retrogression but by economic progress. [Extracted with edits and revision from ‘Flawed Idea Innovation and Retrogression’ by Prabhat Patnaik, Telegraph India]Q.According to the passage, what did the simulations on a model of a capitalist economy by Richard Goodwin reveal about the relationship between innovations and wages?

Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:Richard Goodwin, the well-known American economist who taught at Harvard before migrating to Cambridge, England, because of the McCarthyite witch-hunt of the 1950s, and who, although a Marxist, did some simulations on a model of a capitalist economy. The economy in the model experienced a wave of innovations while output was determined by aggregate demand; and the simulation results showed that unless wages increased significantly because of the introduction of innovations, output and employment at the end of the wave would be lower than at the beginning. There is no reason, however, for such a rise in wages despite the rise in labour productivity because the rise in unemployment through which alone such a rise in labour productivity manifests itself would weaken workers’ bargaining strength for enforcing higher wages. The conclusion about technological change causing economic retrogression in such a capitalist economy therefore remains unaffected.Capitalist economies, however, have not actually seen economic retrogression as a consequence of technological change. The question arises: why not? If as technological change is introduced and there is a simultaneous increase in aggregate demand for some independent reason, then there need not be either a decline in employment or output in the economy introducing such a change. But there is no reason why such an increase should occur within the capitalist sector. It will have to come from outside, and not just as a coincidence; the capitalist sector must cause such an independent expansion in aggregate demand to happen. In short, it will need to have a ‘market on tap’ existing outside of it that it can turn to to prevent a decline in output and employment. This idea, originally advanced by Rosa Luxemburg, has been borne out in practice. Capitalism has generally had such a ‘market on tap’ (a phrase of the economic historian, S.B. Saul), which is why technological change under it has been accompanied not by economic retrogression but by economic progress. [Extracted with edits and revision from ‘Flawed Idea Innovation and Retrogression’ by Prabhat Patnaik, Telegraph India]Q.Which of the following statements is true if technological advancement under capitalism has been accompanied by economic advancement rather than regression?

One of the most critical yet troublesome social policy questions is how many actually suffer because of labor market problems. Our social statistics, in many ways, exaggerate the degree of difficulty. Today unemployment does not have similar effects as compared to it in the 1930's. Then, most of the unemployed were primary earning member of their respective families, when income was usually at the level of subsistence, and when there were no social programs for those not succeeding in the labor market. Increasing affluence, arising out of increase in the families with more than single wage earner, the rising predominance of secondary earners among the unemployed, and new social welfare protection schemes have no doubt mitigated the effect of being without a job.Earnings and income data also exaggerate the extent of suffering. Among many with hourly wage at or below the minimum wage level, the overwhelming majority is from relatively well to do families having multiple-earners. Most of those taken into account by the poverty statistics either have family responsibilities or are elderly or handicapped which keep them out of the labor force, so the poverty statistics are by no means correct indicators of labor market indices.Yet, our social statistics underrate the degree of hardships in the labor-market in many ways. The unemployment counts do not include the millions of fulltime employed workers with wages so low that their families remain in poverty. Low wages and frequent or long time unemployment often cause lack of ability to support oneself. Because the number of people facing unemployment at some time during the year is many times the number unemployed across the year, those who bear the brunt of forced joblessness can equal or surpass average annual unemployment, even though only a small number of the unemployed in any month actually suffer. For every person included in the monthly data, there is one working part-time because of his incapability to find full-time work, or else outside the labor force but looking for an employment. Finally, social welfare schemes in our country have always focused on the elderly, disabled, and dependent, so that the unusual expansion of cash and in-kind transfers does not necessarily mean that those not succeeding are effectively protected.As a result of such contradicting evidence, number of those suffering seriously as a result of labor market problems is uncertain, and, hence, it is debatable if high levels of unemployment can be tolerated or must be countered by job creation and economic stimulus. There is only one unanimous agreement in this deliberation that the extant poverty, employment, and earnings statistics are not adequate for measuring the consequences of labor market problems, their primary applications.Q. Which of the following reflects the main idea of the passage?

Top Courses for CLAT

Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:Richard Goodwin, the well-known American economist who taught at Harvard before migrating to Cambridge, England, because of the McCarthyite witch-hunt of the 1950s, and who, although a Marxist, did some simulations on a model of a capitalist economy. The economy in the model experienced a wave of innovations while output was determined by aggregate demand; and the simulation results showed that unless wages increased significantly because of the introduction of innovations, output and employment at the end of the wave would be lower than at the beginning. There is no reason, however, for such a rise in wages despite the rise in labour productivity because the rise in unemployment through which alone such a rise in labour productivity manifests itself would weaken workers’ bargaining strength for enforcing higher wages. The conclusion about technological change causing economic retrogression in such a capitalist economy therefore remains unaffected.Capitalist economies, however, have not actually seen economic retrogression as a consequence of technological change. The question arises: why not? If as technological change is introduced and there is a simultaneous increase in aggregate demand for some independent reason, then there need not be either a decline in employment or output in the economy introducing such a change. But there is no reason why such an increase should occur within the capitalist sector. It will have to come from outside, and not just as a coincidence; the capitalist sector must cause such an independent expansion in aggregate demand to happen. In short, it will need to have a ‘market on tap’ existing outside of it that it can turn to to prevent a decline in output and employment. This idea, originally advanced by Rosa Luxemburg, has been borne out in practice. Capitalism has generally had such a ‘market on tap’ (a phrase of the economic historian, S.B. Saul), which is why technological change under it has been accompanied not by economic retrogression but by economic progress. [Extracted with edits and revision from ‘Flawed Idea Innovation and Retrogression’ by Prabhat Patnaik, Telegraph India]Q.What is a compelling explanation for the lack of wage increases in a capitalist market structure despite improvements in labor productivity?a)External factors play a role in causing wage stagnation.b)Wage levels are not connected to labor productivity.c)Capitalism relies on the principles of supply and demand.d)Increasing unemployment reduces workers bargaining power.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?
Question Description
Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:Richard Goodwin, the well-known American economist who taught at Harvard before migrating to Cambridge, England, because of the McCarthyite witch-hunt of the 1950s, and who, although a Marxist, did some simulations on a model of a capitalist economy. The economy in the model experienced a wave of innovations while output was determined by aggregate demand; and the simulation results showed that unless wages increased significantly because of the introduction of innovations, output and employment at the end of the wave would be lower than at the beginning. There is no reason, however, for such a rise in wages despite the rise in labour productivity because the rise in unemployment through which alone such a rise in labour productivity manifests itself would weaken workers’ bargaining strength for enforcing higher wages. The conclusion about technological change causing economic retrogression in such a capitalist economy therefore remains unaffected.Capitalist economies, however, have not actually seen economic retrogression as a consequence of technological change. The question arises: why not? If as technological change is introduced and there is a simultaneous increase in aggregate demand for some independent reason, then there need not be either a decline in employment or output in the economy introducing such a change. But there is no reason why such an increase should occur within the capitalist sector. It will have to come from outside, and not just as a coincidence; the capitalist sector must cause such an independent expansion in aggregate demand to happen. In short, it will need to have a ‘market on tap’ existing outside of it that it can turn to to prevent a decline in output and employment. This idea, originally advanced by Rosa Luxemburg, has been borne out in practice. Capitalism has generally had such a ‘market on tap’ (a phrase of the economic historian, S.B. Saul), which is why technological change under it has been accompanied not by economic retrogression but by economic progress. [Extracted with edits and revision from ‘Flawed Idea Innovation and Retrogression’ by Prabhat Patnaik, Telegraph India]Q.What is a compelling explanation for the lack of wage increases in a capitalist market structure despite improvements in labor productivity?a)External factors play a role in causing wage stagnation.b)Wage levels are not connected to labor productivity.c)Capitalism relies on the principles of supply and demand.d)Increasing unemployment reduces workers bargaining power.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2024 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:Richard Goodwin, the well-known American economist who taught at Harvard before migrating to Cambridge, England, because of the McCarthyite witch-hunt of the 1950s, and who, although a Marxist, did some simulations on a model of a capitalist economy. The economy in the model experienced a wave of innovations while output was determined by aggregate demand; and the simulation results showed that unless wages increased significantly because of the introduction of innovations, output and employment at the end of the wave would be lower than at the beginning. There is no reason, however, for such a rise in wages despite the rise in labour productivity because the rise in unemployment through which alone such a rise in labour productivity manifests itself would weaken workers’ bargaining strength for enforcing higher wages. The conclusion about technological change causing economic retrogression in such a capitalist economy therefore remains unaffected.Capitalist economies, however, have not actually seen economic retrogression as a consequence of technological change. The question arises: why not? If as technological change is introduced and there is a simultaneous increase in aggregate demand for some independent reason, then there need not be either a decline in employment or output in the economy introducing such a change. But there is no reason why such an increase should occur within the capitalist sector. It will have to come from outside, and not just as a coincidence; the capitalist sector must cause such an independent expansion in aggregate demand to happen. In short, it will need to have a ‘market on tap’ existing outside of it that it can turn to to prevent a decline in output and employment. This idea, originally advanced by Rosa Luxemburg, has been borne out in practice. Capitalism has generally had such a ‘market on tap’ (a phrase of the economic historian, S.B. Saul), which is why technological change under it has been accompanied not by economic retrogression but by economic progress. [Extracted with edits and revision from ‘Flawed Idea Innovation and Retrogression’ by Prabhat Patnaik, Telegraph India]Q.What is a compelling explanation for the lack of wage increases in a capitalist market structure despite improvements in labor productivity?a)External factors play a role in causing wage stagnation.b)Wage levels are not connected to labor productivity.c)Capitalism relies on the principles of supply and demand.d)Increasing unemployment reduces workers bargaining power.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:Richard Goodwin, the well-known American economist who taught at Harvard before migrating to Cambridge, England, because of the McCarthyite witch-hunt of the 1950s, and who, although a Marxist, did some simulations on a model of a capitalist economy. The economy in the model experienced a wave of innovations while output was determined by aggregate demand; and the simulation results showed that unless wages increased significantly because of the introduction of innovations, output and employment at the end of the wave would be lower than at the beginning. There is no reason, however, for such a rise in wages despite the rise in labour productivity because the rise in unemployment through which alone such a rise in labour productivity manifests itself would weaken workers’ bargaining strength for enforcing higher wages. The conclusion about technological change causing economic retrogression in such a capitalist economy therefore remains unaffected.Capitalist economies, however, have not actually seen economic retrogression as a consequence of technological change. The question arises: why not? If as technological change is introduced and there is a simultaneous increase in aggregate demand for some independent reason, then there need not be either a decline in employment or output in the economy introducing such a change. But there is no reason why such an increase should occur within the capitalist sector. It will have to come from outside, and not just as a coincidence; the capitalist sector must cause such an independent expansion in aggregate demand to happen. In short, it will need to have a ‘market on tap’ existing outside of it that it can turn to to prevent a decline in output and employment. This idea, originally advanced by Rosa Luxemburg, has been borne out in practice. Capitalism has generally had such a ‘market on tap’ (a phrase of the economic historian, S.B. Saul), which is why technological change under it has been accompanied not by economic retrogression but by economic progress. [Extracted with edits and revision from ‘Flawed Idea Innovation and Retrogression’ by Prabhat Patnaik, Telegraph India]Q.What is a compelling explanation for the lack of wage increases in a capitalist market structure despite improvements in labor productivity?a)External factors play a role in causing wage stagnation.b)Wage levels are not connected to labor productivity.c)Capitalism relies on the principles of supply and demand.d)Increasing unemployment reduces workers bargaining power.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.
Solutions for Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:Richard Goodwin, the well-known American economist who taught at Harvard before migrating to Cambridge, England, because of the McCarthyite witch-hunt of the 1950s, and who, although a Marxist, did some simulations on a model of a capitalist economy. The economy in the model experienced a wave of innovations while output was determined by aggregate demand; and the simulation results showed that unless wages increased significantly because of the introduction of innovations, output and employment at the end of the wave would be lower than at the beginning. There is no reason, however, for such a rise in wages despite the rise in labour productivity because the rise in unemployment through which alone such a rise in labour productivity manifests itself would weaken workers’ bargaining strength for enforcing higher wages. The conclusion about technological change causing economic retrogression in such a capitalist economy therefore remains unaffected.Capitalist economies, however, have not actually seen economic retrogression as a consequence of technological change. The question arises: why not? If as technological change is introduced and there is a simultaneous increase in aggregate demand for some independent reason, then there need not be either a decline in employment or output in the economy introducing such a change. But there is no reason why such an increase should occur within the capitalist sector. It will have to come from outside, and not just as a coincidence; the capitalist sector must cause such an independent expansion in aggregate demand to happen. In short, it will need to have a ‘market on tap’ existing outside of it that it can turn to to prevent a decline in output and employment. This idea, originally advanced by Rosa Luxemburg, has been borne out in practice. Capitalism has generally had such a ‘market on tap’ (a phrase of the economic historian, S.B. Saul), which is why technological change under it has been accompanied not by economic retrogression but by economic progress. [Extracted with edits and revision from ‘Flawed Idea Innovation and Retrogression’ by Prabhat Patnaik, Telegraph India]Q.What is a compelling explanation for the lack of wage increases in a capitalist market structure despite improvements in labor productivity?a)External factors play a role in causing wage stagnation.b)Wage levels are not connected to labor productivity.c)Capitalism relies on the principles of supply and demand.d)Increasing unemployment reduces workers bargaining power.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.
Here you can find the meaning of Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:Richard Goodwin, the well-known American economist who taught at Harvard before migrating to Cambridge, England, because of the McCarthyite witch-hunt of the 1950s, and who, although a Marxist, did some simulations on a model of a capitalist economy. The economy in the model experienced a wave of innovations while output was determined by aggregate demand; and the simulation results showed that unless wages increased significantly because of the introduction of innovations, output and employment at the end of the wave would be lower than at the beginning. There is no reason, however, for such a rise in wages despite the rise in labour productivity because the rise in unemployment through which alone such a rise in labour productivity manifests itself would weaken workers’ bargaining strength for enforcing higher wages. The conclusion about technological change causing economic retrogression in such a capitalist economy therefore remains unaffected.Capitalist economies, however, have not actually seen economic retrogression as a consequence of technological change. The question arises: why not? If as technological change is introduced and there is a simultaneous increase in aggregate demand for some independent reason, then there need not be either a decline in employment or output in the economy introducing such a change. But there is no reason why such an increase should occur within the capitalist sector. It will have to come from outside, and not just as a coincidence; the capitalist sector must cause such an independent expansion in aggregate demand to happen. In short, it will need to have a ‘market on tap’ existing outside of it that it can turn to to prevent a decline in output and employment. This idea, originally advanced by Rosa Luxemburg, has been borne out in practice. Capitalism has generally had such a ‘market on tap’ (a phrase of the economic historian, S.B. Saul), which is why technological change under it has been accompanied not by economic retrogression but by economic progress. [Extracted with edits and revision from ‘Flawed Idea Innovation and Retrogression’ by Prabhat Patnaik, Telegraph India]Q.What is a compelling explanation for the lack of wage increases in a capitalist market structure despite improvements in labor productivity?a)External factors play a role in causing wage stagnation.b)Wage levels are not connected to labor productivity.c)Capitalism relies on the principles of supply and demand.d)Increasing unemployment reduces workers bargaining power.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:Richard Goodwin, the well-known American economist who taught at Harvard before migrating to Cambridge, England, because of the McCarthyite witch-hunt of the 1950s, and who, although a Marxist, did some simulations on a model of a capitalist economy. The economy in the model experienced a wave of innovations while output was determined by aggregate demand; and the simulation results showed that unless wages increased significantly because of the introduction of innovations, output and employment at the end of the wave would be lower than at the beginning. There is no reason, however, for such a rise in wages despite the rise in labour productivity because the rise in unemployment through which alone such a rise in labour productivity manifests itself would weaken workers’ bargaining strength for enforcing higher wages. The conclusion about technological change causing economic retrogression in such a capitalist economy therefore remains unaffected.Capitalist economies, however, have not actually seen economic retrogression as a consequence of technological change. The question arises: why not? If as technological change is introduced and there is a simultaneous increase in aggregate demand for some independent reason, then there need not be either a decline in employment or output in the economy introducing such a change. But there is no reason why such an increase should occur within the capitalist sector. It will have to come from outside, and not just as a coincidence; the capitalist sector must cause such an independent expansion in aggregate demand to happen. In short, it will need to have a ‘market on tap’ existing outside of it that it can turn to to prevent a decline in output and employment. This idea, originally advanced by Rosa Luxemburg, has been borne out in practice. Capitalism has generally had such a ‘market on tap’ (a phrase of the economic historian, S.B. Saul), which is why technological change under it has been accompanied not by economic retrogression but by economic progress. [Extracted with edits and revision from ‘Flawed Idea Innovation and Retrogression’ by Prabhat Patnaik, Telegraph India]Q.What is a compelling explanation for the lack of wage increases in a capitalist market structure despite improvements in labor productivity?a)External factors play a role in causing wage stagnation.b)Wage levels are not connected to labor productivity.c)Capitalism relies on the principles of supply and demand.d)Increasing unemployment reduces workers bargaining power.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:Richard Goodwin, the well-known American economist who taught at Harvard before migrating to Cambridge, England, because of the McCarthyite witch-hunt of the 1950s, and who, although a Marxist, did some simulations on a model of a capitalist economy. The economy in the model experienced a wave of innovations while output was determined by aggregate demand; and the simulation results showed that unless wages increased significantly because of the introduction of innovations, output and employment at the end of the wave would be lower than at the beginning. There is no reason, however, for such a rise in wages despite the rise in labour productivity because the rise in unemployment through which alone such a rise in labour productivity manifests itself would weaken workers’ bargaining strength for enforcing higher wages. The conclusion about technological change causing economic retrogression in such a capitalist economy therefore remains unaffected.Capitalist economies, however, have not actually seen economic retrogression as a consequence of technological change. The question arises: why not? If as technological change is introduced and there is a simultaneous increase in aggregate demand for some independent reason, then there need not be either a decline in employment or output in the economy introducing such a change. But there is no reason why such an increase should occur within the capitalist sector. It will have to come from outside, and not just as a coincidence; the capitalist sector must cause such an independent expansion in aggregate demand to happen. In short, it will need to have a ‘market on tap’ existing outside of it that it can turn to to prevent a decline in output and employment. This idea, originally advanced by Rosa Luxemburg, has been borne out in practice. Capitalism has generally had such a ‘market on tap’ (a phrase of the economic historian, S.B. Saul), which is why technological change under it has been accompanied not by economic retrogression but by economic progress. [Extracted with edits and revision from ‘Flawed Idea Innovation and Retrogression’ by Prabhat Patnaik, Telegraph India]Q.What is a compelling explanation for the lack of wage increases in a capitalist market structure despite improvements in labor productivity?a)External factors play a role in causing wage stagnation.b)Wage levels are not connected to labor productivity.c)Capitalism relies on the principles of supply and demand.d)Increasing unemployment reduces workers bargaining power.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:Richard Goodwin, the well-known American economist who taught at Harvard before migrating to Cambridge, England, because of the McCarthyite witch-hunt of the 1950s, and who, although a Marxist, did some simulations on a model of a capitalist economy. The economy in the model experienced a wave of innovations while output was determined by aggregate demand; and the simulation results showed that unless wages increased significantly because of the introduction of innovations, output and employment at the end of the wave would be lower than at the beginning. There is no reason, however, for such a rise in wages despite the rise in labour productivity because the rise in unemployment through which alone such a rise in labour productivity manifests itself would weaken workers’ bargaining strength for enforcing higher wages. The conclusion about technological change causing economic retrogression in such a capitalist economy therefore remains unaffected.Capitalist economies, however, have not actually seen economic retrogression as a consequence of technological change. The question arises: why not? If as technological change is introduced and there is a simultaneous increase in aggregate demand for some independent reason, then there need not be either a decline in employment or output in the economy introducing such a change. But there is no reason why such an increase should occur within the capitalist sector. It will have to come from outside, and not just as a coincidence; the capitalist sector must cause such an independent expansion in aggregate demand to happen. In short, it will need to have a ‘market on tap’ existing outside of it that it can turn to to prevent a decline in output and employment. This idea, originally advanced by Rosa Luxemburg, has been borne out in practice. Capitalism has generally had such a ‘market on tap’ (a phrase of the economic historian, S.B. Saul), which is why technological change under it has been accompanied not by economic retrogression but by economic progress. [Extracted with edits and revision from ‘Flawed Idea Innovation and Retrogression’ by Prabhat Patnaik, Telegraph India]Q.What is a compelling explanation for the lack of wage increases in a capitalist market structure despite improvements in labor productivity?a)External factors play a role in causing wage stagnation.b)Wage levels are not connected to labor productivity.c)Capitalism relies on the principles of supply and demand.d)Increasing unemployment reduces workers bargaining power.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Direction: Read the following passage carefully and answer the questions given below:Richard Goodwin, the well-known American economist who taught at Harvard before migrating to Cambridge, England, because of the McCarthyite witch-hunt of the 1950s, and who, although a Marxist, did some simulations on a model of a capitalist economy. The economy in the model experienced a wave of innovations while output was determined by aggregate demand; and the simulation results showed that unless wages increased significantly because of the introduction of innovations, output and employment at the end of the wave would be lower than at the beginning. There is no reason, however, for such a rise in wages despite the rise in labour productivity because the rise in unemployment through which alone such a rise in labour productivity manifests itself would weaken workers’ bargaining strength for enforcing higher wages. The conclusion about technological change causing economic retrogression in such a capitalist economy therefore remains unaffected.Capitalist economies, however, have not actually seen economic retrogression as a consequence of technological change. The question arises: why not? If as technological change is introduced and there is a simultaneous increase in aggregate demand for some independent reason, then there need not be either a decline in employment or output in the economy introducing such a change. But there is no reason why such an increase should occur within the capitalist sector. It will have to come from outside, and not just as a coincidence; the capitalist sector must cause such an independent expansion in aggregate demand to happen. In short, it will need to have a ‘market on tap’ existing outside of it that it can turn to to prevent a decline in output and employment. This idea, originally advanced by Rosa Luxemburg, has been borne out in practice. Capitalism has generally had such a ‘market on tap’ (a phrase of the economic historian, S.B. Saul), which is why technological change under it has been accompanied not by economic retrogression but by economic progress. [Extracted with edits and revision from ‘Flawed Idea Innovation and Retrogression’ by Prabhat Patnaik, Telegraph India]Q.What is a compelling explanation for the lack of wage increases in a capitalist market structure despite improvements in labor productivity?a)External factors play a role in causing wage stagnation.b)Wage levels are not connected to labor productivity.c)Capitalism relies on the principles of supply and demand.d)Increasing unemployment reduces workers bargaining power.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.
Explore Courses for CLAT exam

Top Courses for CLAT

Explore Courses
Signup for Free!
Signup to see your scores go up within 7 days! Learn & Practice with 1000+ FREE Notes, Videos & Tests.
10M+ students study on EduRev