Talk:Marginal product of labor
| This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Marginal product of labor article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
| Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
 | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
edit
This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 24 August 2021 and 11 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kaybeach1108.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:21, 17 January 2022 (UTC)
Deprod
editI have deprodded the article because I believe it can be expanded from its current state to resemble Marginal revenue.Smallman12q (talk) 22:22, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
- Google currently has 2.5m results...so I'm going to start expanding the article now.Smallman12q (talk) 22:29, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
Examples
editThe question is why a manager of a firm would begin operating with one worker? Why wouldn't the manager fully staff the operation before beginning productio? As for diminishing returns, why wouldn't a rational manager reserve capacity for future expansion? --Jgard5000 (talk) 23:20, 15 September 2009 (UTC)Jgard5000
- There is nothing about MP of labor that says that a manager *would* begin operating with one worker. The example of one worker serves as a simple way of describing MP. Wikiant (talk) 11:52, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
Yeager
editLeland Yeager is NOT a member of the Austrian School, he is a self-described fellow traveller of both Austrians and monetarists —Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.254.18.3 (talk) 21:13, 31 January 2010 (UTC)
Marginal Product of Labor Table
editHow is it that hiring the eighth worker causes output to fall, but hiring the ninth causes it to rise again? I suppose something like that might be empirically observable (maybe the eighth and ninth people go off in a closet by themselves and cease bothering the first seven workers), but it doesn't seem to be a good illustration of the economic concepts being discussed. The image's page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Marginal_Product_of_Labor1_copy.png) doesn't offer any clarity.
I propose that if no one can come up with an objection, the table be altered so that marginal returns do not go positive again after initially turning negative. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.205.22.18 (talk) 20:46, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
- There's a mistake in the table on the 7th row - it should be 28 | 4 OR 27 | 3. The example and table are good to grasp the topic and help, but the table needs to be fixed. --SkyHiRider (talk) 22:01, 1 January 2012 (UTC)
Still a mistake
editThere's a mistake in the table on the 7th row - it should be output: 28, MPL: 4 OR output: 27, MPL 3...
And I cannot understand, why the output falls with a 8th and 10th worker.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 37.24.119.49 (talk) 19:37, 5 July 2014 (UTC)
adding to Marginal Productivity Ethics
editMarginal productivity ethics is nicely covered. I just wanted to add more to the economist that argues labor theory vs margin productivity to show both sides of the argument for research purposes.Kaybeach1108 (talk) 16:15, 7 November 2021 (UTC)kaybeach1108