A share

Abstract: The last few decades have seen a spectacular integration of the global economy through trade. The share of imports (or exports) in GDP for the United States has approximately doubled in the last two decades, and if intra-OECD trade is omitted, the same is true for the OECD countries generally. Trade does remain a seemingly small fraction of U.S. GDP. This is not surprising in view of the fact that large economies trade less with others, and more internally. But the modest share of trade in total national income hides the fact that merchandise trade as a share of merchandise value-added is quite high for the United States and the OECD, and has been growing dramatically. In fact, if one focuses on merchandise trade relative to value-added, the world is much more integrated today than at any time during the past century. The rising integration of world markets has brought with it a disintegration of the production process, in which manufacturing or services activities done abroad are combined with those performed at home. Companies are now finding it profitable to outsource increasing amounts of the production process, a process which can happen either domestically or abroad. This represents a breakdown in the vertically-integrated mode of production—the so-called ‘‘Fordist’’ production, exemplified by the automobile industry—on which American manufacturing was built. A number of prominent researchers have referred to the importance of the idea that production occurs internationally: Bhagwati and Dehejia (1994) call this ‘‘kaleidoscope comparative advantage,’’ as firms shift location quickly; Krugman

Abstract: Partnerships and profit sharing are often claimed to motivate workers by giving them a share of the pie. But in organizations of any significant size, the free-rider effects would seem to choke off...

Abstract: Recent equity carve‐outs in U.S. technology stocks appear to violate a basic premise of financial theory: identical assets have identical prices. In our 1998–2000 sample, holders of a share of company A are expected to receive x shares of company B, but the price of A is less than x times the price of B. A prominent example involves 3Com and Palm. Arbitrage does not eliminate this blatant mispricing due to short‐sale constraints, so that B is overpriced but expensive or impossible to sell short. Evidence from options prices shows that shorting costs are extremely high, eliminating exploitable arbitrage opportunities.