How did the Classical Political Economists, Smith, Ricardo and Marx respectively address the issue of economic development and growth?

  1.How did the Classical Political Economists, Smith, Ricardo and Marx respectively address the issue of economic development and growth? To what extent are their ideas applicable to developing countries today? 2.Explain why according to Rostow the period between the creation of the preconditions for takeoff and the takeoff, are so fraught with peril for developing countries. What does this imply about the kinds of policy both internal to a country and with respect to the response of developed countries that should be undertaken to promote development? Given this, what would be the relative merits of “unbalanced growth” vs. “balanced growth”?  3.The economists Roy Harrod and Evsey Domar both argued that growth of capitalist economies is likely to be poised on a “knife edge”. Explain what is meant by this “knife edge” and what critical assumption they make to support this argument. What does this imply about the role of the state in development? How does the Solow model differ? Why does the Solow model predict convergence? Which of the two makes a more realistic assumption? Explain.  4.Explain what is similar in both Rostow and Marx in their respective views of the movement from a “traditional society” to a “modern society” or from a “pre-capitalist mode” to the “capitalist mode”. Where do they disagree? Explain how dependency theorists incorporate Marx’s views on economic development and also explain where they depart fundamentally from both Marx and Rostow. What does this imply about the relationship between capitalism, development and the role of the State?  this link for the book : ,+fifth+edition.&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj4387avKTSAhUKi1QKHSgEAE0Q6AEIGjAA#v=onepage&q=Economic%20Development%20by%20Wayne%20Nafziger%2C%20fifth%20edition.&f=false 

"Order a similar paper and get 100% plagiarism free, professional written paper now!"

Order Now