http://sedici.unlp.edu.ar:80/handle/10915/297 2026-08-14T17:17:10Z 2026-08-14T17:17:10Z López Abuin, Alberto J. http://sedici.unlp.edu.ar:80/handle/10915/8931 2019-05-14T04:03:11Z 1961-12-01T00:00:00Z

Articulo The crisis of transportation Económica; vol. 8, no. 29-30 The transportation problem in Argentina is erroneously set: its signs have been inverted. The transportation capacity existing in the country is more than sufficient for the needs of the national economy. The only economic solution is its better utilization and requires only progressive and partial investments. One must avoid unnecessary duplications of expenses, imports and investment, which should be reserved for sectors showing a deficit and underdeveloped areas for lack of alternative means. The transportation system should be integrated and adequate to the country's social and economic structure; it must serve its development, supply the needs, redistribute and level wealth and income. Its contributive regulations and tariffs should assist these aims. There is an urgent necessity for a complete reconsideration and an integral and scientific reset of the problem, as everybody is aware of the superficially and incoherence of criterion formulated without statistical support.

1961-12-01T00:00:00Z The transportation problem in Argentina is erroneously set: its signs have been inverted. The transportation capacity existing in the country is more than sufficient for the needs of the national economy. The only economic solution is its better utilization and requires only progressive and partial investments. One must avoid unnecessary duplications of expenses, imports and investment, which should be reserved for sectors showing a deficit and underdeveloped areas for lack of alternative means. The transportation system should be integrated and adequate to the country's social and economic structure; it must serve its development, supply the needs, redistribute and level wealth and income. Its contributive regulations and tariffs should assist these aims. There is an urgent necessity for a complete reconsideration and an integral and scientific reset of the problem, as everybody is aware of the superficially and incoherence of criterion formulated without statistical support. Montaner, Antonio http://sedici.unlp.edu.ar:80/handle/10915/8930 2019-05-14T04:03:10Z 1961-12-01T00:00:00Z

Articulo Limits to the theory of competition Económica; vol. 8, no. 29-30 In spite of its impressive systematic unity, the market and price theory is in danger of internal contradictions which the author calls the "Paradox of the competitive price formation". Up to now no definition says what competition is, but merely describes under what conditions is exists and which are its consequences. This point is stressed by means of a dogmatic retrospective view. Competition is not a characteristic feature of one market form, but is the fundamental phenomenon of any economy, as long as it is a process; as an organization form of market process competition is, on the contrary, essentially a creature of government. In connection with the theory of economic behavior, competition can be determined as the possibility of alternatives between which the market participants can freely choose. But competition as a behavior can be active only in a state of desequilibrium, whereas in a state of equilibrium it is, per definitionem, in repose. This obviously unsatisfactory result in being analyzed from the point of view of the monopolistic theory, economic history and sociology and confronted with the theory of costs and the theory of games. Finally the author advises to leave economics open to all methods by means of the synthesis of deductive-theoretical and sociologic-historical research, instead of adjusting it simply to the mathematical theory, as in the case of mere functional analysis and model constructions there is no other way than to substitute one abstraction for an other.

1961-12-01T00:00:00Z In spite of its impressive systematic unity, the market and price theory is in danger of internal contradictions which the author calls the "Paradox of the competitive price formation". Up to now no definition says what competition is, but merely describes under what conditions is exists and which are its consequences. This point is stressed by means of a dogmatic retrospective view. Competition is not a characteristic feature of one market form, but is the fundamental phenomenon of any economy, as long as it is a process; as an organization form of market process competition is, on the contrary, essentially a creature of government. In connection with the theory of economic behavior, competition can be determined as the possibility of alternatives between which the market participants can freely choose. But competition as a behavior can be active only in a state of desequilibrium, whereas in a state of equilibrium it is, per definitionem, in repose. This obviously unsatisfactory result in being analyzed from the point of view of the monopolistic theory, economic history and sociology and confronted with the theory of costs and the theory of games. Finally the author advises to leave economics open to all methods by means of the synthesis of deductive-theoretical and sociologic-historical research, instead of adjusting it simply to the mathematical theory, as in the case of mere functional analysis and model constructions there is no other way than to substitute one abstraction for an other. Weber, Adolfo http://sedici.unlp.edu.ar:80/handle/10915/8929 2019-05-14T04:03:09Z 1961-12-01T00:00:00Z

Articulo Economics as a science Económica; vol. 8, no. 29-30 In a work published fifty years ago, as he called the attention upon the deficiency of the Historical School, the author pointed out as the best way for the solution of the problems of practical life a realistic economic theory, free of valuating judgments and provided with efficient conceptual tools. After half a century the trajectory of economics moved to the other extreme, non less dangerous, of the mathematical-statistical tendency of the "New Economics". Without discussing the obvious merits of the contributions made by Keynes`school or those of Schmoller, it is nevertheless necessary to point out -as Albrecht, Predöhl, Albert have done lately in opposition to Schneider and Tinbergen- that also the "New Economics" when practicing the "platonism of models", instead of getting us closer to the goal of a realistic economic theory, is giving us an "economic blindness with mathematical clarity".

1961-12-01T00:00:00Z In a work published fifty years ago, as he called the attention upon the deficiency of the Historical School, the author pointed out as the best way for the solution of the problems of practical life a realistic economic theory, free of valuating judgments and provided with efficient conceptual tools. After half a century the trajectory of economics moved to the other extreme, non less dangerous, of the mathematical-statistical tendency of the "New Economics". Without discussing the obvious merits of the contributions made by Keynes`school or those of Schmoller, it is nevertheless necessary to point out -as Albrecht, Predöhl, Albert have done lately in opposition to Schneider and Tinbergen- that also the "New Economics" when practicing the "platonism of models", instead of getting us closer to the goal of a realistic economic theory, is giving us an "economic blindness with mathematical clarity".