Bachelor of Business Allocative Efficiency

Question: Discuss about theBachelor of Businessfor Allocative Efficiency. Answer: Introduction The economic problem posit that the finite resources of economy are inadequate to satisfy all the wants and needs of human. Economic efficiency is the concept of utilizing or administering scarce resources to produce the maximum output of services and goods possible. From the biblical perspective, economic efficiency desirable since it is good stewardship as it is not good stewardship to utilize resources to produce less than maximum output. There is a close connection between efficiency and employment. Allocative efficiency, for example, occurs when all of the resources of economy are employed fully. Efficiency relates to division of labor and specialization which requires that all workers can produce as much in total. For more maximum output to be produce the economy should be at full employment. A trade-off exists between current and future consumption which can be illustrated by consumption-savings model. A consumer can decide to consume all his current income today and all his future income in the future without borrowing or savings. When the consumer saves, he gives up consumption today for assets that will be exchanged for consumption in the future. When the consumer borrows (negative savings), he can consume more today, however, he has to give up consumption tomorrow for loan repayment. Human trafficking across the Burma-China border is related to economics because economics is the organization of money and industry hence human trafficking remains a typical example of trade or industry. Economics can be viewed as the study of scarcity, and in China, women are a scarce commodity because there is demand for women in China. Women are insufficient to satisfy the demand for brides (Hackney 2015). This point clearly demonstrates that human trafficking is linked to economics. Feeding leeches is a typical example of where producers are attempting to produce at the lowest possible cost which is purely economics where the workers are slaves (Blanger, H?ng, and Linh 2013). Education and policing of trafficking is deficient which is a clear manifestation of the insufficiency of resources to provide effective education and police borders rigorously. Burman government could create some meaningful employment to her people by providing microcredit to help develop employment opportunities (Sharygin, Ebenstein and Das Gupta 2013). Burma and China can also engage in better policing that focus on a crackdown on human trafficking. Societies in China and Burma can also put emphasis on a higher value on women and people in general (Hackney 2015). Potential changes in Burma and China to reduce the cross-border human trafficking may include the removal of Chinas one child policy and finding gender-balance options. Also, since one of the central reasons for human trafficking in Burma and China is poverty, Burma can reduce the human trafficking by putting more into education to alleviate the poverty cycle. The country can as well embrace such policies that focus more on the creation of job opportunities. Economics can provide a response to human trafficking. Burma and China enjoy abundant labor force hence can invest in industries to develop the entire nation. Meaningful employment opportunities should be delivered to poor people. The policy makers should remain cautious regarding the substitution. For example, in case Burma ceases the supply of humans to China, they must ensure that no supply will emerge from other neighborhoods. Lorna Janes story has a close linkage to economics. The enterprises offer people job opportunities whereby the workers are selected because they love the brand. Lorna Jane is currently developing a market in the US which gives Australia export income. I concur with the statement that Lorna Jane story is a typical example of a business that promotes human trafficking. Women feel increasingly good when they wear the clothing of Lorna Janes enterprise. Lorna Jane also holds that women who dress in active wear become motivated to be more active thereby relating motivation to being healthier than those women who do not use active wear. Loran Jane even goes further to charge that health is a new wealth thus luring women to fall into her marketing tricks (Greenhalgh 2013). As reflected in Isaiah 65-21-22, Jeremiah 32:43-44 and Acts 2:44-45 and Acts 4:32-35, it becomes apparent that God remains supportive of an economic system whereby the private property and work ethics are respected. Accordingly, the position held by David Noebel remains supportive of capitalism. This is the economic system with both private property and freedom of exchange. Individual are free to possess property as well as freely trade with some limitations stated in law as well as custom. BZ104 holds the same position as held by David Noebel. Nevertheless, many critics of capitalism have surfaced. The Christian critics anchor their arguments on Acts 2:44-45 and Acts 4:32-35 and subsequently make a case for something in the middle between socialism and pure capitalism. In my view, therefore, it appears to me that the Biblical viewpoint on entirely supports capitalist. However, individuals must remain responsible for providing for those poor. This can be affirmed by reading Matthew 25:3146 whereby it was clear that Jesus made it clear by talking about separating the goats and sheep. Conversely, some individuals oppose the idea that God is a strong believer in capitalism and such arguments always leave them perplexed. Scrutinizing the Old Testament Scripture will demonstrate that public welfare engrossed on the provision for foreigners (sojourners), orphans as well as widows. Apart from this fact, the welfare remained a private issue. Various scriptures highlight the significance of generosity to the needy population. Moreover, Jubilees law and associated laws were precisely intended to reinstate the place of the poor as reflected in Leviticus 25:8-55. The position of David Noebel is deeply rooted in various verses such as Exodus 20:15, Exodus 2017, Numbers 36:6-9, Leviticus 25:14, Leviticus 25:23, and Exodus 22:1-14. The opponents also hold that it must be acknowledged that stealing and coveting are stimulated by the existence of private property which remains the fundamental feature of the capitalist economic system. As reflected in Proverbs 28:10, God supports individual work by associating a person who tills his land to having abundant bread but that who does not tilt to poverty which tends to support the private property. This can also be supported by the Ecclesiastes 3:13 which hold that every individual needs to drink and eat as well as enjoy the good of is labor as that is the gift of God. God also seems to have supported the private property in First Timothy 5:8 whereby those who do not provide for their own particularly his household is perceived as having denied the faith and worse compared to unbelievers. Second Thessalonians 3:10 (b) even puts it more open by supporting the denial of food to those who do not work. It should also be recognized that the ten commandments as documented in Deuteronomy 5 with the greatest commandment being recorded in Deuteronomy 6:5 and further quoted by Jesus in Mark 12:30 demands our expression of love to God with a tripartite being (1 Thessalonians 5:23), relates to economics. Economic Sphere is one of the human activities through which people express their love to God. The work has to come to a halt on the Sabbath as it is the antidote of materialism whereby people have to switch their attention from the material wellbeing to relationship with God and individuals themselves. The Pilgrims starved due to the failed communism plan. They had envisioned to create a colony anchored on Common Course and Condition'. This is a communism plan whereby the produce was to be shared among the households. The plan failed and the governor (Bradford Williams) concluded that communism was a lesser economic system. Communism was unjust as the people who worked forgone fruits of their labor to individuals who put less effort. David resolved that the communal economy goes against the wisdom of God hence assigned land to an individual family by its size. He permitted individuals to grow corn for own use, rather than for common stock. Subsequently, the pilgrims have had abundant production in America. God supports work as outlined in Genesis 1:26 by giving people dominion (stewardship). Genesis 2:15 affirms this as God put Adam in the Garden of Eden to work it since there was no one to work the ground (Genesis 2:7). Economics principles require people to work for all goods. In my opinion, therefore, private enterprise is the wisdom of God as it has come out clearly from the discussion. References Blanger, D., H?ng, K.T. and Linh, T.G., 2013. Transnational Marriages between Vietnamese Women and Asian Men in Vietnamese Online Media. Journal of Vietnamese Studies, 8(2), pp.81-114. Greenhalgh, S., 2013. Patriarchal demographics? China's sex ratio reconsidered. PoPulation and develoPment review, 38(s1), pp.130-149. Hackney, L.K., 2015. Re-evaluating Palermo: The case of Burmese women as Chinese brides 1. Anti-Trafficking Review, (4), p.98. Sharygin, E., Ebenstein, A. and Das Gupta, M., 2013. Implications of China's future bride shortage for the geographical distribution and social protection needs of never-married men. Population studies, 67(1), pp.39-59. Van Schendel, W., Lyons, L. and Ford, M., 2012. Labour migration and human trafficking in Southeast Asia: critical perspectives (Vol. 44). Routledge.