Cambridge Capital Controversy

INTRODUCTION Since the mid-1950's, discussions on neoclassical capital handling became apparent in the next 20 years. This led to a series of exchanges between scholars related to Cambridge in England and Cambridge in Massachusetts (USA). This discussion is widely mentioned in the literature as "Cambridge Capital Theory Dispute". The relevance of this controversy is that the criticism of Cambridge (UK) neoclassical theory is based on the use of "capital" as a single scale measure to judge the theoretical illegality of prices and distribution, It is in the fact that it includes both basic premise.

The compatibility between neoclassical 'general equilibrium theory' and the economy which develops over time and produces capital goods has problems. The Cambridge Capital Dispute debated this issue in the 1960s. Focus on growth theory, general theory, capital theory, marginal productivity distribution theory

The concept of working capital caused a major controversy among financial wizards, and they have different views on this. There is no commonly accepted definition of working capital. Roughly speaking, the concept of working capital common in existing financial literature is as follows. According to this concept, the current and current assets are called total working capital or working capital. Total current assets include cash, marketable securities, accounts receivable, inventory, prepaid expenses, and prepayment taxes. This concept is also known as a quantitative or generalized method. Quoting Weston and Brigham, "Total working capital refers to our investment in short-term assets such as cash, short-term securities, accounts receivable and inventory." This concept will help maximize investment in current assets and financing.

Who has intellectual capital? Ownership of intellectual capital is a controversial issue. First, intellectual capital is irrelevant and invisible as machinery, equipment and financial capital. Second, defining specific intangible assets is difficult for someone or agency that defines it. Third, taking the capabilities and abilities of employees as an example, it is not completely owned by the company. This also makes it impossible to purchase intangible resources (such as corporate culture) (the usual exceptions are patents and copyrights), while on the other hand physical resources can easily be purchased and sold.

Data breach of Cambridge Analytica on Facebook is part of the iceberg. Given the logic of capital digitization, this platform is increasingly profitable business model, a completely rational business model, the sale of information tools to the government, usually very realistic It is a physical battlefield. Of course, this is just a small part of a broader game that sells this persuasion tool to affordable businesses and companies.