Папка для сдачи кандидатского минимума по английскому языку
Министерство образования РФ
Камский государственный политехнический институт
Кафедра иностранных языков
Папка для сдачи кандидатского минимума
по иностранному (английскому) языку
Выполнила: соискатель от кафедры ММИТЭ,
Шибанова Елена Владимировна
Специальность 351400
«Прикладная информатика в экономике»
Научный руководитель: доцент, к. ф.-м.н.
Смирнов Юрий Николаевич
Проверила: старший преподаватель
Ишмурадова Альфия Мухтаровна
г. Набережные Челны
2003 год
Содержание:
Содержание: 2
1. Текст для перевода на языке-оригинале 3
2. Перевод текста с языка оригинала 10
3. Словарь экономических терминов по специальности 18
4. Сочинение «Моя будущая научная работа» 35
5. Библиография 36
1. Текст для перевода на языке-оригинале
The firm and its objectives
We have now discussed the data which the firm needs for its decision-
making—the demand for its products and the cost of supplying them. But,
even with this information, in order to determine what decisions are
optimal it is still necessary to find out the businessman's aims. The
decision which best serves one set of goals will not usually be appropriate
for some other set of aims.
1. Alternative Objectives of the Firm
There is no simple method for determining the goals of the firm (or of
its executives). One thing, however, is clear. Very often the last person
to ask about any individual's motivation is the person himself (as the
psychoanalysts have so clearly shown). In fact, it is common experience
when interviewing executives to find that they will agree to every
plausible goal about which they are asked. They say they want to maximize
sales and also to maximize profits; that they wish, in the bargain, to
minimize costs; and so on. Unfortunately, it is normally impossible to
serve all of such a multiplicity of goals at once.
For example, suppose an advertising outlay of half a million dollars
minimizes unit costs, an outlay of 1.2 million maximizes total profits,
whereas an outlay of 1.8 million maximizes the firm's sales volume. We
cannot have all three decisions at once. The firm must settle on one of the
three objectives or some compromise among them.
Of course, the businessman is not the only one who suffers from the
desire to pursue a number of incompatible objectives. It is all too easy to
try to embrace at one time all of the attractive-sounding goals one can
muster and difficult to reject any one of them. Even the most learned have
suffered from this difficulty. It is precisely on these grounds that one
great economist was led to remark that the much-discussed objective of the
greatest good for the greatest number contains one "greatest" too many.
It is most frequently assumed in economic analysis that the firm is
trying to maximize its total profits. However, there is no reason to
believe that all businessmen pursue the same objectives. For example, a
small firm which is run by its owner may seek to maximize the proprietor's
free time subject to the constraint that his earnings exceed some minimum
level, and, indeed, there have been cases of overworked businessmen who, on
medical advice, have turned down profitable business opportunities.
It has also been suggested, on the basis of some observation, that
firms often seek to maximize the money value of their sales (their total
revenue) subject to a constraint that their profits do not fall short of
some minimum level which is just on the borderline of acceptability. That
is, so long as profits are at a satisfactory level, management will devote
the bulk of its energy and resources to the expansion of sales. Such a goal
may, perhaps, be explained by the businessman's desire to maintain his
competitive position, which is partly dependent on the sheer size of his
enterprise, or it may be a matter of the interests of management (as
distinguished from shareholders), since management's salaries may be
related more closely to the size of the firm's operations than to its
profits, or it may simply be a matter of prestige.
In any event, though they may help him to formulate his own aims and
sometimes be able to show him that more ambitious goals are possible and
relevant, it is not the job of the operations researcher or the economist
to tell the businessman what his goals should be. Management's aims must be
taken to be whatever they are, and the job of the analyst is to find the
conclusions which follow from these objectives—that is, to describe what
businessmen do to achieve these goals, and perhaps to prescribe methods for
pursuing them more efficiently.
The major point, both in economic analysis and in operations-research
investigation of business problems, is that the nature of the firm's
objectives cannot be assumed in advance. It is important to determine the
nature of the firm's objectives before proceeding to the formal model-
building and the computations based on it. As is obviously to be expected,
many of the conclusions of the analysis will vary with the choice of
objective function. However, as some of the later discussion in this
chapter will show, a change in objectives can, sometimes surprisingly,
leave some significant relationships invariant. Where this is true, it is
very convenient to find it out in advance before embarking on the
investigation of a specific problem. For if there are some problems for
which the optimum decision will be the same, no matter which of a number of
objectives the firm happens to adopt, it is legitimate to avoid altogether
the difficult job of determining company goals before undertaking an
analysis.
2. The Profit-Maximizing Firm
Let us first examine some of the conventional theory of the profit-
maximizing firm. In the chapter on the differential calculus, the basic
marginal condition for profit maximization was derived as an illustration.
Let us now rederive this marginal-cost-equals-marginal-revenue condition
with the aid of a verbal and a geometric argument.
The proposition is that no firm can be earning maximum profits unless
its marginal cost and its marginal revenue are (at least approximately)
equal, i.e., unless an additional unit of output will bring in as much
money as it costs to produce, so that its marginal profitability is zero.
It is easy to show why this must be so. Suppose a firm is producing
200,000 units of some item, x, and that at that output level, the marginal
revenue from x production is $1.10 whereas its marginal cost is only 96
cents. Additional units of x will, therefore, each bring the firm some 14
cents = $1.10 — 0.96 more than they cost, and so the firm cannot be
maximizing its profits by sticking to its 200,000 production level.
Similarly, if the marginal cost of x exceeds its marginal revenue, the firm
cannot be maximizing its profits, for it is neglecting to take advantage of
its opportunity to save money—by reducing its output it would reduce its
income, but it would reduce its costs by an even greater amount.
We can also derive the marginal-cost-equals-marginal-revenue
proposition with the aid of Figure 1. At any output, OQ, total revenue is
represented by the area OQPR under the marginal revenue curve (see Rule 9
of Chapter 3). Similarly, total cost is represented by the area OQKC
immediately below the marginal cost curve. Total profit, which is the
difference between total revenue and total cost is, therefore, represented
by the difference between the two areas—that is, total profits are given by
the lightly shaded area TKP minus the small, heavily shaded area, RTC. Now,
it is clear that from point Q a move to the right will increase the size of
the profit area TKP. In fact, only at output OQm will this area have
reached its maximum size—profits will encompass the entire area TKMP.
But at output OQm marginal cost equals marginal revenue—indeed, it is
the crossing of the marginal cost and marginal revenue curves at that point
which prevents further moves to the right (further output increases) from
adding still more to the total profit area. Thus, we have once again
established that at the point of maximum profits, marginal costs and
marginal revenues must be equal.
Before leaving the discussion of this proposition, it is well to
distinguish explicitly between it and its invalid converse. It is not
generally true that any output level at which marginal cost and marginal
revenue happen to be equal (i.e., where marginal profit is zero) will be a
profit-maximizing level. There may be several levels of production at which
marginal cost and marginal revenue are equal, and some of these output
quantities may be far from advantageous for the firm. In Figure 1 this
condition is satisfied at output OQt as well as at OQm. But at OQt the firm
obtains only the net loss (negative profit) represented by heavily shaded
area RTC. A move in either direction from point Qt will help the firm
Страницы: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11
