test

Rational economic choice

A major role in the conditions of limited resources is played by the choice of the consumer between the options for using resources. The optimal economic choice depends on the costs and the result obtained.

There are three main actors in the economy: consumer, producer and society. In conditions of limited resources, the consumer must measure his income with expenses. The manufacturer decides what to produce, in what quantity, also commensurate all costs and revenues. This is how a rational economic choice is formed. That is, with a minimum of costs, a maximum result is achieved.

According to the cost of the good, which can be very different, the consumer decides what it will be profitable for him to purchase. And if he chooses one or another product at a favorable price, knowing that it will bring a good result, then we can talk about a rational (optimal) economic choice. Therefore, it is associated with the assessment of the opportunity cost of a good.

Information support for decision-making in the management of the Federal Property Management Agency

To date, a wide range of DBMS is represented on the software market, among them there are DBMS that allow you to implement the basic functions necessary for a simple application that does not impose increased requirements on the functionality...

Organizational and economic calculation of the office of an otorhinolaryngologist

The cabinet is equipped with equipment in accordance with the equipment standard in accordance with Appendix No. 3 of the order of the Ministry of Health and social development RF dated 12. 11. 2012 N 905n "Standard for equipping an otorhinolaryngological office"...

Organization of continental lunch service in the restaurant of the Mir Hotel (Kharkiv) for a group of tourists from Germany

When choosing a banquet hall, it is necessary to take into account: · capacity of the hall; Compliance of the interior with the nature of your celebration; quality of service and variety of menus; design, embellishments...

Valuation of JSC "Gazprom" gas distribution Chelyabinsk

The comparative approach uses two types of information: stock market information about the selling prices of shares (Russian Trading System, MICEX, etc.)...

consumer behavior

Consumers make a rational (optimal) choice in the market, i.e. choose goods so as to achieve the maximum satisfaction of their needs with a given limited budget ...

The subject of economic theory

There are different ways to use resources and different goals that are achieved when using them. There is also the possibility of moving resources from one application to another. Assuming that the amount of resources (labor...

Entrepreneur as a subject of the economic process

The quality of a person's life is largely determined by how fully he manages to satisfy his material and spiritual needs. A person cannot not satisfy his needs, because he, one might say ...

Development of a business plan for CJSC "Germes"

Self-regulation (SRO) in the field of construction, reconstruction, overhaul of capital construction facilities ( construction activities) (SROS)...

Development of a business plan for an enterprise for the production of soft toys

The working capital of an enterprise is financial resources invested in current assets (raw materials, materials, fuel, energy, etc.) ...

Calculation of technical and economic indicators of the enterprise "Optics"

Table 9. Selection of the main equipment No. p./p Name of equipment Type, model, brand Purpose Productivity, Lenses / hour Unit cost, thousand rubles. Quantity Total cost, thousand rubles...

Improving the methodology for the formation of an insurance stock for industrial enterprises

Traditionally, stocks are divided into transport, preparatory, technological, current, seasonal and insurance (Buffer stock -- BS). The components of all stocks (with the exception of insurance and seasonal stocks) are calculated as follows...

Creation of an online store of chocolate sweets

Our potential buyers are residents of Moscow and the Moscow region. Our segment in the market - people of the middle strata of society, living as in the city ...

consumer choice theory

The behavior of the consumer in the market, especially when buying expensive goods (for example, real estate) is associated with a situation that can be called uncertainty. The consumer is at some risk...

Characteristics of the economic and commercial activities of the enterprise "Vesna"

The importance of choosing a supplier is explained not only by the functioning of a large number of suppliers of the same material resources on the modern market, but also by the fact that it should be, first of all, ...

Pricing policy of the organization

The pricing policy and strategy should be consistent with the specific marketing strategy of the organization. The purpose of such a strategy may be: 1) penetration into a new market; 2) product market development...

Utility maximization rule

Critics of the theory of marginal utility have formulated the paradox of water and diamonds. They believed that water should have maximum usefulness, since it is vital, and diamonds should be minimal, since one can live without them. Therefore, the price of water must be higher than that of diamonds.

This contradiction was resolved in the following way. In nature, water reserves are not limited, and diamonds are rare. Therefore, the total utility of water is large, but the marginal utility is small, while for diamonds, on the contrary, the total utility is small, and the marginal utility is large. The price is determined not by the total, but by the marginal utility. The relationship between marginal utility and price can be illustrated by the following formula:

Where MU x , MU y , MU z– marginal utilities of goods; P x , R y , R z is the price of these goods.

This ratio shows utility maximization rule: the income of the consumer should be distributed in such a way that the last ruble spent on the acquisition of each type of goods would bring the same marginal utility. For example, a consumer wants to buy three goods A, IN, WITH to meet your needs. Assume that the marginal utility of a good A is 100 utils, good B– 80 utils, boons WITH- 45 utils. At the same time, the price of a good A equal to 100 rubles, good B- 40 rubles, benefits WITH- 30 rubles. Let's present these data in tab. 4.2.

Table 4.2

Marginal Utility and the Price of Goods

As can be seen from the table, the distribution of the consumer's money does not bring him maximum utility, since the rule of utility maximization is not observed in this case. Because good IN brings the maximum weighted utility (i.e., marginal utility per 1 ruble of costs), then the funds must be distributed in such a way as to increase the amount of consumption of good B and reduce the consumption of good A. In this case, the utility maximization rule must be satisfied.

The consumer should discard the last copy of the good A, and purchase with the saved 100 rubles. 2.5 parts of the good IN. As a result, we obtain the following relation (Table 4.3).

Table 4.3

Consumer equilibrium in cardinal theory

Having thus distributed the monetary income among the goods A, IN And WITH, the consumer will be able to extract the maximum satisfaction of their needs.

G.I. Ruzavin

We choose, we are chosen. How often it does not match! The economy is not only an arena for the struggle of opposing interests, an endless chain of ups and downs, stabilization and stagnation, but also a fertile field of study for a philosopher-methodologist. Can choice in the force fields of the economy be rational? To what extent the concepts of rational choice in economics are applicable in other areas social studies? These topical issues for the multipolar world are in the focus of attention of Professor G.I. Ruzavin.

Rational Choice Contradictions

The concept of rational choice, developed within the framework of modern economic theory, is currently put forward as a universal research paradigm for all social sciences and humanities. So, for example, R. Schwery states that economics has developed “a special approach that can be applied to the analysis of both the market and non-market sectors public life. This is, in fact, the main mission of rational choice theory. However, this theory is entirely focused on the rational behavior of the subject in a market economy and does not take into account irrational and even irrational actions and motivations. In practical terms, such a choice focuses primarily on individualism and therefore opposes itself to collectivism, completely ignoring the contradictions that arise between individual and public interests.

Without denying the need for a rational choice of an individual and his active position in the development of society, in the proposed article we tried to draw attention to the contradictions that arise between individual and public interests with an excessive exaggeration of the role of the individual in such a choice.

What is a rational choice?

Any human activity has an expedient character, and this implies a clear understanding of the goal, its setting and the choice of ways to achieve it. In everyday and practical life such a choice is made on the basis of everyday experience, in which a choice based on common sense and intuition will be considered rational or reasonable. However, common sense and intuition are only enough to solve relatively simple tasks. In more difficult cases solutions scientific problems and complex tasks that arise in production and socio-economic activities, one has to turn to the construction of rational choice models. When building such a model, the scheme of activity includes, firstly, the exact formulation and justification of the goal, or, as they say, the target function; secondly, a complete enumeration of all possible alternatives or ways to achieve the goal; thirdly, an assessment of each alternative in terms of its value or utility, as well as the likelihood of its implementation in reality. Ultimately, from all available alternatives, the one that best suits the goal in terms of its usefulness and probability of implementation is selected. In mathematical terms, a rational choice is one that corresponds to the maximum or minimum value of the objective function. For example, in a market economy, the maximum value of such a function will correspond to obtaining the greatest profit, and the minimum - to the lowest production costs.

Already when constructing a model of rational choice, we are faced with a discrepancy between the model of reality or a contradiction in the mental image of a particular reality. Therefore, building a model is a process of resolving such a contradiction, bringing the model in line with the real state of affairs, bringing it closer to reality. But we encounter such contradictions in any process of cognition, and especially in

theoretical modeling. In the case under consideration, we are faced not just with the knowledge and modeling of certain objects, but with choice of the many possible alternatives to action, behavior, or problem solving.

Such a choice should not be arbitrary, but justified, reasonable or rational. The validity of such a choice is primarily related to its purpose, and reasonableness or rationality depends on the methods and means used to achieve the ultimate goal. Therefore, the contradictions that arise in the selection process are primarily associated with the identification of rational and irrational approaches, both to the selection process itself and to the assessment of possible alternatives for its implementation.

Focusing on the individual rational choice of the subject, the existing economic concept of choice does not take into account the irrational and even irrational decisions and actions of the economic entity, which can lead not only to undesirable, but obviously negative consequences. Indeed, the achievement of maximum benefit or utility by an individual often conflicts with the interests of society. Therefore, the study of rational and irrational actions of individuals and separate groups, which are always observed in society, constitute an important problem of socio-economic research.

Other controversies arise in assessing the usefulness and likelihood of various choice alternatives. They essentially determine the extent to which the choice as a whole is rational. To get a more concrete idea of this, let us turn first to the emergence of the idea of rational choice itself, and then to economics, where it has found essentially the greatest application.

The concept of rational choice in economics

The ideas of rational choice first arose in the 18th century, but not in economics, but in the teachings of the Scottish school of morality, on the one hand, and the principles of the utilitarian school, on the other. Both of these schools rejected the traditional requirement to set moral standards according to religious beliefs and biased a priori principles. The behavior of people and their actions, they argued, must be judged by the results to which they lead. Therefore, they cannot be assessed in advance as good and bad until these results are known. But for this, people must have freedom of choice in their actions and be responsible for them.

The founder of the school of utilitarianism, Jeremy Bentham, was guided by the principle that ethics should be based on achieving happiness for the greatest number of people. He even believed that this happiness could be mathematically calculated as a balance of pleasure and pain. Therefore, each person is given the opportunity to make a reasonable choice of their behavior. This fundamentally individualistic conception of morality was subsequently used by Adam Smith, who belonged to the Scottish school, in the creation of classical political economy.

“Each individual person,” he wrote, “... has in mind only his own interest, pursues only his own benefit, and in this case he invisible hand heading towards a goal that was not his intention. In pursuing his own interests, he often serves the interests of society more effectively than when he consciously seeks to serve them ”(emphasis mine. - G.R.) .

The metaphor of the invisible hand that controls the behavior of people in the market is designed to show that a rational choice based on taking into account people's own interests, under all conditions, turns out to be the most effective means of rational management. However, Smith himself does not disclose the mechanism for achieving such a goal. Therefore, some modern authors believe that long before Norbert Wiener, the founder of cybernetics, he discovered the principle of negative feedback. It is this principle, as is known, that ensures the stability of dynamic systems, in particular, order in a competitive market. But most likely, Smith revealed the influence of the free choice of market participants on the mechanism of price formation on it. Indeed, if the demand for goods increases, then prices rise, and vice versa, if demand decreases, then prices fall.

Undoubtedly, the idea of rational choice plays an important role in the analysis of not only economic, but also any form of human activity. Such activity always has an expedient character, and this implies a clear awareness and goal setting, and most importantly, the possibility of choosing a specific solution or alternative to achieve the goal. But the practical realization of such a goal is carried out in society not without struggle and contradictions. However, supporters of the concept of rational choice in economics do not want to notice this, starting from A. Smith himself and ending with F. Hayek. Note that in the above quote, Smith argues that the pursuit of self-interest more effectively promotes the public interest,

than conscious service to society. True, in the era of free competition, the real contradictions of the economy were not so clearly expressed as to draw attention to them. Therefore, ideas about the self-sufficiency of market regulation dominated classical political economy until the Great Depression of the 1930s. last century. The depression and the crisis showed with their own eyes that market regulation is not self-sufficient and therefore cannot remove the contradictions between the interests of different sections of society. Meanwhile, advocates of rational choice continued to insist that individual choice always leads to an increase in social wealth and is therefore rational.

At present, representatives of the modern economic elite are beginning to speak about the illusory nature of such ideas. “Life would be much easier,” declares the famous financier George Soros, “if Friedrich Hayek were right and the general interest would be obtained as an unintended result of people acting in their own interests. However, the summation of narrow self-interests through the market mechanism entails unintended negative consequences.

The contradictions that arise in the theory of economic choice are connected with the very interpretation of the concept of rationality. Since economic theory is based on the principle of methodological individualism, the concept of rationality acquires a subjective character in it. If the subject aims to achieve the maximum benefit and considers its implementation rational, then such a goal may come into conflict with the interests of other subjects and society as a whole. Is it possible to consider his choice rational in this case? For example, if an entrepreneur, hoping to take advantage of existing infrastructure, decides to build a chemical plant near locality, then from his individual point of view he will consider his choice quite rational. But from the point of view of the inhabitants, such rationality is subjective and therefore comes into conflict with broader public interests. Almost every subject is forced to reckon with the interests of other subjects and interact with them in one way or another. Therefore, the contradictions that arise between them can be resolved by creating appropriate rules for the behavior of market participants, not to mention compliance with general requirements state regulation and antimonopoly legislation. It follows that the very concept of rational choice in economics needs further development.

refinement and development. As is known, this concept is based on a more fundamental principle of rationality, which causes a lot of controversy and criticism.

In classical economic theory, rationality was seen as objective a characteristic of the processes under study, in which it was assumed that the decision-maker was considered as an ideal "economic person" (Homo economicus), who has complete information about the state of affairs in the market, is not subject to errors and always makes the right decisions to maximize his benefits. Such a person in any situation chooses the best, the best way actions. Noticing the abstract and unrealistic nature of this approach, the supporters of neoclassical theory in economics began to interpret it in terms of subjective terms. Even M. Weber considered such an interpretation necessary to reveal the subjective motives of economic entities, although he did not deny the possibility of an objective interpretation of rationality. On the contrary, one of the founders of mathematical economics, V. Pareto, considered rationality as an objective criterion of economic knowledge and action. In his opinion, the achievement of the goal depends not only on the information that an individual subject has, but also on those who have much more information.

Although the opposition of the objective interpretation of rationality to the subjective one as a whole is unjustified, it points to the need for their difference, which plays a significant role in the characterization of expedient objective human activity. M. Weber turns to subjective interpretation precisely for analysis, as he puts it, goal-oriented activities, i.e. clarification of motives, intentions and intentions of acting subjects. V.Pareto, on the contrary, emphasizes that such activity should also be based on objective existing knowledge and information to be successful.

In modern philosophical discussions on rationality, it is usually associated only with the processes of acquiring and substantiating scientific knowledge. The criteria of rationality in these cases are the requirements for the correspondence of knowledge to the laws of logic and the style of thinking established in science. Simply put, knowledge is considered reasonable if it satisfies the requirements of the laws and standards of thinking. However, at present, the concept of rationality is also used to analyze the expedient actions of people in various fields of activity. This application of the concept

rationality even more corresponds to the nature of practical than theoretical activity. Let us not forget, however, that in all such cases we are talking about rational choice, which differs from arbitrary and deliberate choice in its practical and theoretical validity.

Economic efficiency, like any form social activities, depends, firstly, on the subjective rationality of the choice of individuals, and secondly, on an objective rational assessment of the objective function, which consists of a total assessment of the utility and probability of possible alternatives for realizing the set goal. The cumulative weighted assessment of the utility and likelihood of each alternative makes it possible to choose, if not optimal, then a more satisfactory solution to the problem. In this regard, noteworthy is the position Nobel laureate Herbert Simon, who believes that rational choice should not always be associated with obtaining the maximum benefit or utility. “The entrepreneur,” he writes, “may not care at all about maximization, he may simply want to receive the income that he considers sufficient for himself.” This conclusion he confirms not only by concrete economic evidence, but also by considerations relating to psychology. "Man," he says, satisfied a living being that solves a problem by searching... and not maximizing a being who, in solving a problem, tries to find the best (based on a certain criterion) alternative. Such restrictions on the maximization of rational choice have to be reckoned with especially in social administration and politics.

Rational choice in social management

The notions of an optimally acting “economic man” who always makes the right decisions turned out to be clearly not suitable for social management, since it does not take into account the fact that in the behavior and actions of people, along with undoubtedly rational components, there are irrational and even irrational components. That is why G. Simon, instead of the ideal model of "economic man", put forward the model " administrative person”, in which, based on all available information and a probabilistic assessment of random and unforeseen circumstances,

the goal is to find a satisfactory solution to the assigned management problem. The restrictions that are imposed here on rational choice are due to many circumstances that arise in real life:

Unforeseen events of a random nature that can only be estimated with varying degrees of probability;

Cognitive capabilities and intellectual abilities of the administrator himself and his assistants;

Political and organizational conditions for making managerial decisions, which in a democratic society are determined by the interaction of various groups, teams and associations pursuing different goals and protecting different interests;

Finally, the ability to make the right decisions comes with time and depends on experience and improves with practice.

As far as sociology is concerned, many scholars are aware that individual choices can lead to undesirable and even obviously negative consequences. Supporters of the concept of rational action, although they emphasize the need for a normative and rational approach in sociological analysis, nevertheless object to their interpretation in terms of benefits and disadvantages, as is done in economics. The most important condition such an analysis is the disclosure of contradictions in the interaction of rational and irrational aspects in the development of social processes, identifying and evaluating the role of traditions and innovations in them.

The study of such contradictions should not be limited, however, to a simple statement of the interaction between the rational and the irrational in social processes: it is necessary to analyze the moments of transition and transformation of the rational into the irrational in order to prevent an undesirable development of events. The study of such transformations, according to A.G. Zdravomyslov, consists, firstly, in the study of the motivation of the subject's behavior, the identification of rational and irrational moments in it; secondly, in establishing a rational measure of emerging social institutions; thirdly, in revealing the degree of rationality of the current practical policy.

Rational choice in politics

Although individual choice in politics is made at the micro level, in particular during election campaigns, referendums, polls, etc., the rules of choice themselves are established at the macro level. The contradiction that arises here, according to the Nobel laureate James Buchanan, can be resolved by creating in civil society a “constitution of politics”, which is a kind of cast from the social contract of the ideologists of the Enlightenment of the 18th century. But unlike the latter, this constitution is based not on the ideas of goodness and justice, but on the principles of market exchange. Buchanan explicitly states that applying the idea of market exchange to politics undermines the common misconception that people participate in politics because they seek justice and goodness in society.

“Politics,” he argues, “is a complex system of exchange between individuals in which the latter collectively strive to achieve their private goals, since they cannot realize them through ordinary market exchange. In the market, people exchange apples for oranges, and in politics, they agree to pay taxes in exchange for benefits that everyone needs: from the local fire department to the court.

In other words, politics is based on making collective decisions that benefit many. Thus, the contradiction between the state and the individuals that make up society is resolved by concluding a social contract between them, primarily related to taxation. However, the success of political choice is achieved by its maximization. The voter will vote for the party that promises to cut taxes. The maximization of benefits in the politics of the party is achieved by obtaining the largest number of votes in parliament, parties unite in coalitions to get the maximum number of votes for the adoption of the desired bill, etc. Since the parties act as defenders of the interests of certain social groups, strata and classes of society, insofar as it is impossible to achieve any social harmony and justice in society. D. Buchanan understands this very well, and therefore his “constitution of politics” is aimed at protecting society from extreme forms of arbitrariness on the part of the state. To do this, he considers it necessary to adopt the relevant constitutional laws by universal suffrage.

The principles of rational choice can, to a certain extent, explain some of the features political activity, such as the results of voting in elections, the forging of coalitions in parliaments, the division of power between winning parties in elections, etc. All this constitutes only the external, superficial side of the complex internal political life in modern society don't open it internal mechanisms And driving forces. Therefore, they greatly simplify political life and the events and processes taking place in it, and therefore, can neither explain nor even predict trends political development society.

Can rational choice theory become universal?

a paradigm for the social sciences and humanities?

Having discussed the attempts to apply the economic theory of rational choice in sociology and political science, as the disciplines closest to economics, we can unequivocally state that it cannot claim the role of a universal research paradigm in the social sciences. It is true, of course, that this theory was able to satisfactorily explain how, from the disordered actions of individuals in society, an ordered order eventually arises, for example, a spontaneous order in a competitive market, consisting in an equilibrium between supply and demand. And this makes it possible to regulate the exchange of goods. But already in such a market, contradictions constantly arise at the present time, when monopolies penetrate into it, violating this order. Therefore, the idea of rational choice does not work here.

The situation of choice has to be encountered not only in the economy, but also in various spheres of social activity and even in Everyday life. However, the difference between the spheres of such activity imposes its own specifics on the nature of the choice in them. Therefore, one cannot agree with the opinion of R. Schwery that the economic theory of choice was able to "celebrate the success of its crusade aimed at conquering all other sciences." He believes that this theory "formalizes the logic that guides people who make choices in various situations of everyday life" .

were developed in the famous work of J. von Neumann and O. Morgenstern "Game Theory and Economic Behavior". Is it true, mathematical models, created by specialists in these disciplines, were first used by economists. This is understandable, since economics turned out to be the most suitable science for applying these models. But this does not give economists the right to arrange "crusades to conquer all other sciences," as R. Schweri states.

First, experts from other sciences, when faced with choice situations, use the principles and models general theory decision-making, rather than private models of economists.

Secondly, Schweri himself admits that rational choice theory "cannot operate with various social variables that are difficult to define in economic terms" .

Thirdly, the possibility of applying some ideas and even models of economic science does not turn specific social sciences and humanities into a part or section of the economy. Each of these sciences has its own special subject and specific research methods that are not covered by rational choice theory. Therefore, attempts to conquer them by the economy with the help of the rational choice paradigm would mean striving, if not for the elimination of the social sciences and the humanities, then at least for their reduction, or reduction to economics.

Ventzel E.S. Operations research. M., 1980.

Shwery R. Decree. op. S. 51.

The basic tenets of rational choice theory are rooted in neoclassical economics (as well as in utilitarian ideas and game theory; Levi et al., 1990). Based on various models, Friedman and Hechter (1988) developed a model of rational choice theory, which they called "wireframe".

The subject of study in rational choice theory is acting subjects. The latter are seen as purposeful or intentional. That is, actors have goals towards which their actions are directed. In addition, it is believed that actors have their own preferences (or "values", "utilities"). Rational choice theory does not consider what these preferences are or their sources. It is important that the action is taken to achieve the goals corresponding to the hierarchy of preferences of the acting subject.

Although rational choice theory assumes consideration of the goals or intentions of actors, it does not ignore the possibility of limiting actions, distinguishing two main varieties of them. The first is the lack of resources. The available resources vary among actors. In addition, their access to other reserves is not the same. Those with a large amount of resources can achieve goals relatively easily. But for those who have a small supply of them or do not have it at all, it is difficult or impossible to achieve the goal.

Related to the problem of scarcity of resources is the concept opportunity costs(Friedman & Hechter, 1988, p. 202). In pursuit of a given goal, actors must estimate the costs they will incur by abandoning the next most attractive action. An actor may refuse to achieve the most valuable landmark for himself, if the resources available to him are insignificant, and also if, for this reason, the chances of achieving the desired are small, and if, in pursuing this goal, he risks not reaching the next highest value. Actors are viewed here as actors seeking to maximize their own benefit 1 , and, accordingly, goal setting involves an assessment of how the chances of achieving the most important target are related to the impact of this result on achieving the second most important goal.

Another source that limits individual action is social institutions. According to Friedman and Hechter,

[an individual's] actions from birth to death are constrained by family and school rules; laws and regulations, rigid installations; churches, synagogues and mosques; hospitals and funeral homes. By limiting the range of courses of action available to individuals, the imposed rules of the game—including norms, laws, programs, and voting rules—systematically affect social outcomes (Friedman & Hechter, 1988, p. 202)

These restrictions are related to social institutions, provide positive and negative sanctions that encourage some actions of subjects and prevent others.

Friedman and Hechter name two other aspects that they consider fundamental to rational choice theory. The first is the linkage mechanism, or the process by which "separate individual actions are combined, giving rise to social result» (Friedman & Hechter, 1988, p. 203). The second is the important role of information in rational choice. It used to be thought that actors had the necessary information (to the full or sufficient extent) to make a purposeful choice from the alternative possibilities available to them. However, there is now a growing consensus that the quantity or quality of available information is highly variable, and that this variation has a profound effect on the choice of actors (Heckathorn, 1997).

At least the first steps in the theory of exchange were influenced by the elementary theory of rationality. Further, considering the theory of rational choice, we will focus on more complex aspects associated with this concept.

"Social Psychology of Groups"

Main part " Social psychology groups” (Thibaut & Kelly, 1959) is devoted to the relationship of two subjects. Thibault and Kelly were especially interested in the process of interaction between these two people and the consequences that it has for the members of the "dyad". Like the work of behaviorism (although its influence on the study of these scientists is insignificant) and in line with the theory of exchange, the main subject of analysis for Thiebaud and Kelly is the problem of rewards and costs:

1 However, representatives modern theory rational choice recognize that this desire and ability to maximize benefits is limited (Heckathorn, 1997).

The ratio of rewards and costs for each of the two subjects will be the better, the (1) the greater the reward for him will be the possible behavior of another person and (2) the lower the possible costs of such behavior. If each is able to provide the other with the maximum reward at their own minimum cost, then the relationship not only allows both to achieve an excellent combination of rewards and costs, but also provides the additional advantage that both people achieve the optimal ratio of rewards and costs at the same time ( Thibaut & Kelly, 1959, p.31)

Molm and Cook (1995) argue that three points from the concept of Thiebaud and Kelly played a special role in the development of the theory of exchange. The first is the attention to the issues of power and subordination, which became central to Richard Emerson and his followers (see more on this later). Thibault and Kelly believe that the source of power in the interaction of two subjects is the ability of one of them to influence the essence of the results achieved by the other subject. They distinguish two types of power. First - "Force of Destiny" This happens when actor A influences the results of actor B, “Not thinking about what he is doing. B"(Thibaut & Kelly, 1959, p. 102). Second - "behavioral control"“If, by varying his behavior, A causes B to also change his own, the first controls the behavior of the second” (Thibaunt & Kelly, 1959, p. 103). In a dyad, both subjects are dependent on relationships between themselves. Therefore, each of them in one way or another has power over the other. This interdependence limits the amount of power one can exert over another.

The second provision from the theory of Thiebaud and Kelly, which influenced the development of the theory of exchange, is connected with the concepts comparison level(US) and level of comparison of alternatives(US alt). Both of these levels are standards for evaluating the outcome of a relationship: RS is a standard that allows an actor to determine whether a particular relationship can be attractive or quite satisfying to its expectations. This standard is usually based on an assessment of what, as an actor, he thinks he deserves in the case of this relationship. That relationship, which is above the SA, is considered to satisfy the request; below - unsatisfactory. Establishing the level of comparison is based on cash or symbolic experience, which involves taking into account the totality of the consequences of behavior known to the acting subject. The USalt standard is involved by the actor when deciding whether to terminate the relationship or continue it. When the consequences are rated below the alt DC, the subject will refuse such a relationship. Establishing the level of comparison of alternatives is based on taking into account the best - that is, those that provide the greatest reward and minimum costs - from the alternatives available to the acting subject. Molme and Cook argue that this type of thinking provided the basis for some of Emerson's ideas about social networks: social networks that provide actors with an alternative choice of partners, the concept of UCalt laid the groundwork for Emerson to do so later” (Molm & Cook, 1995, p. 213).

Thibault and Kelly's third contribution to exchange theory was the concept of a "results matrix". It is a way of visualizing "all the possible events that can occur in the interaction between A and B" (Tibaut & Kelley, 1959, p. 13). The two axes of the matrix are elements of the behavioral "repertoires" of subjects A and B. Each cell contains "results that seem to be a reward for the subject and costs incurred by him in each particular episode of interaction" (Tibaut & Kelley, 1959, p. 13). This matrix was applied in the 1960s and 1970s, for example, in the study of transactions and cooperation issues to consider patterns of interdependence, and these studies, in turn, “stimulated the further more complex study of social exchange” (Molm & Cook, 1995, p. 214).

The economy is called the sphere of public life, covering the interaction of production and consumption.

Economics is a science that studies the behavior of participants in the process of economic activity. It is also a way of organizing the activities of people aimed at creating the benefits they need.

This scientific discipline is divided into two sections: microeconomics and macroeconomics.

Microeconomics involves the analysis of the economic actions of individuals, individual households, firms and industries.

In this control work some components of microeconomics will be considered.

Rarity (limitation) of resources

Any production is usually a purposeful expenditure of resources to obtain any results and satisfy needs. If we analyze the economic organization of production, we can say that people live in a world disabilities. People's resources (material, financial, labor, etc.) have qualitative and quantitative limitations.

The scarcity of resources in the modern economy is divided into two types: absolute (lack of resources to meet all needs at the same time) and relative (when there are resources to meet any part of the needs).

Economic resources are rare or available in limited quantities, and the needs of society and its members are unlimited. Therefore, society is forced to constantly solve the problem of choice, to decide which goods and services should be produced and which should be abandoned. At the same time, it is necessary to achieve the most appropriate and effective use rare resources to fully meet the needs of society and its members.

Rational economic choice

Household as a Market Subject

A household is a unit consisting of one or more people. It operates in the consumer sector. Households sell their labor and their goods on the market in the form of certain types of goods and services, as well as in the form of land, capital, and property. Most households would like to increase the quantity and quality of goods and services they consume, depending on how limited their income is.

Household is characterized by:

· Manual labor;

· Old technology;

· Slow pace of development;

traditional methods of production.

The household has been developing since ancient times, the slave-owning, feudal system, collective farms. Today it can be divided into three main types: urban, rural and suburban.

In modern society, there are two main forms of economy: subsistence and commodity.

In the natural form of the economy, the production of material goods and services is carried out for consumption within the economic unit itself.

The commodity form of the economy is a form in which material goods and services are produced by separate commodity producers, each of which specializes in the development of any one product, one service, and therefore, in order to meet social needs, it becomes necessary to buy and sell goods on the market. The commodity form can be divided into simple production (manual labor) and capitalist production (machine labor).

To date, it is impossible to clearly distinguish between an absolutely subsistence or an absolutely commodity economy, since usually part of the created material goods and services is consumed within the economic unit itself, and the other part goes into sale and purchase on the market.

There are certain commodity-money relations between the market and the household:

· Household purchases from producers of goods and services;

· The sale by enterprises of goods and services to the population that were produced by the household;

· Sale by the household, the population of resources, factors of production - land, labor, capital to enterprises and firms;

Payment by enterprises and firms to the population, households of the corresponding income (wages, profits, interest, etc.)

The household cannot fully relate to the commodity or natural form in the same way as it cannot comply with all the conditions for the implementation of commodity-money relations.

A household can produce food for personal consumption or for sale. At the same time, it, as a subject of the market, uses personal labor. Although in some cases, the household purchases special household appliances for the production of goods and services, or hires specialists in a particular production area. This will already be called wage labor within the household.

The household enters the market not only as a buyer of consumer goods. Often he also acts as a supplier of resources to producers or to the market.

Thus, the household, as a market entity, is characterized by the fact that it makes a demand for consumer goods and supplies resources.

Theory of consumer behavior

total and marginal utility.

Society consists of consumers who have the right to independently choose the product and purchase volume. He dictates his desires and preferences (freedom of consumer choice), which must be taken into account by the manufacturer. It happens that with the help of advertising, the consumer succumbs to suggestion and purchases an unnecessary product.

There are two main aspects of consumer behavior - these are his preferences and opportunities. The buyer wants, given the opportunities, to find a set of goods that would bring him maximum utility, the greatest satisfaction.

People consume goods and services because they have the property of being a source of pleasure (useful). The cost of a product is determined not by the labor costs for its production, but by the useful effect that it can bring to the consumer. At the same time, each additional unit of goods brings to the consumer additional (marginal) utility, which is of a diminishing nature. That is, the greater the number of units of a consumed good, the lower the marginal utility derived from the consumption of each subsequent unit of this good. Also, three equal factors take part in the creation of utility - labor, capital and land.

Marginal utility is the amount of additional utility obtained from the increase in the amount of consumption of a good by an additional unit, all other things being equal.

Subjective utility implies the rarity of a good, the limited size of its supply. It depends on the nature of the consumption of goods. As a rule, the commodity producer does not incur costs if they are not justified by the purpose, results, utility of future benefits. But at the same time, obtaining a result, achieving utility is unthinkable without costs.

General utility is like rational option which most consumers aspire to. It forms consumer equilibrium. That is, by consuming a certain number of units of a good, a person receives a total utility consisting of the sum of diminishing marginal utilities.

Thus, most consumers seek to maximize total utility.

By maximizing the difference between total and marginal utility, the consumer can benefit or save his resources, since a unit of a good purchased by a person will not be either marginal or total utility for him, unless a person buys a good or service in large quantities. The consumer's response is influenced by changes in income, so his choice can be unpredictable. It turns out that when maximizing the difference between total and marginal utility, he does not receive satisfaction. And this will not be allowed by the manufacturer himself, who will try to lure the buyer with discounts, advertising, and other means.

The consumer will not maximize marginal utility, since, according to the theory of consumer behavior, it can be assumed that he will look for the optimal solution in conditions of limited resources. And it is impossible to maximize both types of utility, since these concepts are not compatible.

To get the maximum utility from consuming a given set of goods in a limited period of time, each of them must be consumed in such quantities that the marginal utility of all consumed goods will be equal to the same value. Thus, the consumer seeks to obtain the same (total) utility from each product.

Perfect Competition

This type of competition exists in such areas of activity where many producers offer a homogeneous product, but none of them is able to influence the price of the product.

In a real economy, the market of perfect competition practically does not occur. It represents an ideal structure that modern markets can only aspire to (the first statement is true). Although, if we compare the point of view put forward in his textbook by Kozyrev V.M. "Fundamentals of modern economics", it can be assumed that such markets existed.

Due to the great shortcomings of this type of competition in the process of developing a market economy system, it gives way to imperfect competition. Even if the market is very similar to the relations of perfect competition, then one of its main characteristic features is not necessarily observed or not completely fulfilled:

· A large number of sellers and buyers;

· The sold product is the same for all manufacturers, and the buyer can choose any seller of goods to make a purchase;

· The impossibility of control over the price and volume of purchase and sale creates conditions for constant fluctuations in these values under the influence of changes in market conditions;

All buyers and sellers have the same market and full information(no one knows more);

· Complete freedom to "enter" the market and "leave".

In a competitive market, manufacturers seek to reduce production costs per unit of output to maximize profits. As a result of this, the possibility of lowering the price is created, which increases the volume of sales and the income of the manufacturer. So the price of this producer's product cannot be equal to his marginal revenue (the second statement is false).

In economics, there is a method that allows you to quickly determine the nature of competition: this is the nature of the price response to changes in supply and demand. For the demand for the products of an individual firm under perfect competition, the price is a given value. Neither the buyer nor the seller can influence its change, since if the seller asks for a higher price, then the buyers will go to his competitors. If he asks for more low price, then it will not satisfy all demand (the share of its product on the market is not large). Thus, adaptation to the market under conditions of perfect competition is expressed in the volume of sales and the volume of purchases.

The manufacturer sells his product at a pre-existing market price. The perfectly competitive demand curve is perfectly elastic and horizontal. 3

(third statement is wrong)

Perfect competition is by far the most efficient of all market structures, since at all times competition will always give rise to concern for the producer about his product. He will constantly change its components, its range, update, which is very important for the buyer, at the same time monitor its competitors, open new points, expand its business, attracting new specialists. The income of such a producer will grow, surpassing the demand for his goods or services.

Conclusion

Every person is essentially an economist. All his life he feels the limitedness of his resources, tries to fight this with the help of savings. He strives to maximize the benefits he needs, as a result, making a rational economic choice.

The market is a huge system of constant interaction between the buyer and the manufacturer. Any seller will always try to attract more consumers than his competitor, by any known means. The manufacturer must take into account the desires of the consumer and their capabilities.

New subjects and objects of commodity relations constantly appear in the market system. And some relationships that exist and change over time, such as the household, will not be a thing of the past, since it is one of the foundations of the economy.