The question is not clear. Do you mean (1) zero unemployed labour or (2) the opportunity cost of an unemployed person being zero?
1. If there is zero unemployment, the opportunity cost is the value of marginal product, which can be measured as the cost to the employer (wages, payroll tax, on-costs such as sick leave, recreation leave, superannuation).
2. If the person employed would otherwise be unemployed, the opportunity cost is not zero. It is the value of leisure forgone plus any additional costs the worker incurs in presenting himself or herself for work (transport, clothing, relocation).
2006-11-16 11:38:50
·
answer #1
·
answered by Marakey 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'm sorry. The question is not clear to obtain an apt answer. If you need an answer as technically as possible, I may require a little more information based on the principles of Economics. But I can presently provide you a general answer. 'The opportunity cost of unemployed labour' can't be zero unless there is wilful denial of the opportunity that an unemployed person would get. The world is wide and large enough still requiring vast manpower to be utilised.
2006-11-16 12:03:39
·
answer #2
·
answered by SRIRANGAM G 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
first you need to link opportunity cost with both macro and micro and draw a production possibility curve showing capital and consumption on both axes then clearly highlight the benefits and costs of unemployment in relation to the question
2015-06-15 02:59:58
·
answer #3
·
answered by Tinotenda 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
the opportunity cost of 100% labour is what that labour _could_ be doing instead of work...i.e., rest.
2006-11-16 11:13:30
·
answer #4
·
answered by Philosophy Prof. 2
·
0⤊
0⤋