Why Say’s Law is Imperfect Research

Name:
Title: Why Say’s Law is Imperfect
Institution:
Introduction
The Say’s introduction of the “law of markets” attracted several criticisms from a number of theorists who subscribed to the fact that accumulated excessive supply that results in production stagnation provided a real possibility. However, some theorists such as Mill with links to Ricardian School disputed the conclusion based on the fact that an adjustment in prices is capable of maintaining an equilibrium that occurs between aggregate demand and supply. However, in their perspective, lack of demand does not halt growth within markets. The wisdom as provided by Say’s Law provides some knowledge and understanding of the microeconomic market processes. The approach from the Austrian perspective asserts that the understanding of the markets takes a spontaneous step by step processes. The markets have a way of revealing the players that coordinate their processes. These processes that operate in the market are not necessarily the result of human design. The activities and operations in the market take place in a decentralized and not top-down process. However, from the Hayek’s perspective, the spontaneous activities in Say’s Law contrast the various structures that result from human designs. In this case, the markets including the institutions of morality, money as well as law emerge through a process that comprises social evolution in the long-run. The complexity of the markets comprises of myriad actions that are independent of an individual or firm activities. However, in the view of the numerous actions that take place in the market including the factors that affect the operations, it is never easy to ascertain the real facts in an attempt to pre-empt significant limitations. Specifically, there is no point where market outcomes can be predicted to sufficient details. The extent of knowledge required for detailing the necessary expertise appears to be demanding, therefore, making it difficult the prediction of markets in totality (Kates 194).
In contrast with Say’s Law, the only possible way that could permit the understanding of the complexity within the market involves the use of economic and market principles. The understanding of the markets demands the aspect of explication of the principles that safeguard human action rather than from the prediction of the results. Moreover, the Law of Demand states that with all factors constant, people tend to purchase less of a commodity depending on the high price attached to it. This does not give sufficient room for specific predictions of the number of purchases made. However, the inability to predict the markets may not posse any greater challenge since patterns of prediction are still possible through explanation of market principles that underlies economic mechanisms intelligible. However, there is also the tendency of making negative predictions through such principles that alleges the impossibility of performing that which should be done. Such boundaries are provided by the principles of economics that point to the various undesirable as well as unintended consequences of different intentions. In some economic contexts, Say’s Law is considered as one of th...