In terms of economic theory, the opportunity cost of labor is usually treated as leisure forgone, which totally ignores questions of working conditions. As mentioned earlier, David Spencer does an excellent job in this matter, although I should add that my book, The Invisible Handcuffs covers the same subject.
From: pen-l-boun...@lists.csuchico.edu [mailto:pen-l-boun...@lists.csuchico.edu] On Behalf Of Jurriaan Bendien Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2013 10:58 AM To: pen-l@lists.csuchico.edu Subject: [Pen-l] Wanted: some good critical discussions of "opportunity cost" The problem with the theory of opportunity costs, I’ve found, is that the story of what it means changes appreciably in the history of economic thought. That means that there are really a variety of approaches to opportunity costs, there isn’t one single scientific definition that is the definite concept. The “shadow price” concept is a bit like the “price discovery” concept – it is the price you have, when you don’t have a price. There are theoretical issues here, insofar as it is implied that prices which do not exist determine prices which do exist, and so on. At one level, the concept of opportunity cost is presented like a bit of grandma’s wisdom: if you choose to have something then you must also forego something else, because you can’t have your cake and eat it too. But at another level, there are attempts at fairly arcane mathematics to explain the concept as an economic law, and to explain whole price structures in terms of opportunity costs. I wondered if anybody had actually probed the coherence of the concept, and whether there is anything like a history of the concept’s evolution anywhere. But maybe I am asking for too much. I will dig around some more, and see what I can find. But thank you very much meantime for your suggestions, it all helps. I am grateful. Jurriaan
_______________________________________________ pen-l mailing list pen-l@lists.csuchico.edu https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
