인문학
사회과학
자연과학
공학
의약학
농수해양학
예술체육학
복합학
지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2013.7
- 수록면
- 63 - 82 (20page)
- DOI
- 10.18284/jss.2013.12.32.2.63
이용수
초록· 키워드
The pre-modern economics was focused on the normative thoughts, but modern economics is focused on the positive thoughts. But the pre-modern ‘just price’ concept still influences contemporary economic policies. An example is American anti-gouging law. The law is a kind of price ceiling on the necessaries in emergency such as Hurricane. There have been heated debates on the justice and efficiency of the law.
Supporters of the law insist that price gouging is immoral and should be prohibited by the law in order to protect consumers from the exploitation by the greedy sellers. But opponents insist that the law does not fulfill its purpose, because many consumers can not buy the necessaries and the allocation of them is inefficient under the law.
This paper analyzes the merits and demerits of the anti-gouging law in terms of medieval ‘just price’ and modern price control theory. My conclusion is that the validity of the law depends on the price elasticity of the supply, income inequality, and the ratio of spending on the item.
상세정보 수정요청해당 페이지 내 제목·저자·목차·페이지Supporters of the law insist that price gouging is immoral and should be prohibited by the law in order to protect consumers from the exploitation by the greedy sellers. But opponents insist that the law does not fulfill its purpose, because many consumers can not buy the necessaries and the allocation of them is inefficient under the law.
This paper analyzes the merits and demerits of the anti-gouging law in terms of medieval ‘just price’ and modern price control theory. My conclusion is that the validity of the law depends on the price elasticity of the supply, income inequality, and the ratio of spending on the item.
정보가 잘못된 경우 알려주세요!
목차
- Ⅰ. 서론
- Ⅱ. 가격규제의 이론과 실제
- Ⅲ. 공정가격론
- Ⅳ. 가격폭리처벌법
- Ⅴ. 가격폭리처벌법에 대한 비판과 평가
- Ⅵ. 결론
- 참고문헌
- 〈Abstract〉
참고문헌
참고문헌 신청최근 본 자료
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2015-300-001219689