填空题
In economics, the law of comparative advantage says that two (31) will both gain from trade if, in the absence of trade, they have different relative costs for producing the same goods. Even if one country is more efficient in the production of all goods (32) the other, both countries will still gain by trading with each other, as (33) as they have different relative efficiencies.
For example, (34) using machinery, a worker in one country can produce both shoes and shirts (35) 6 per hour, and a worker in a country with less machinery can produce (36) 2 shoes or 4 shirts in an hour, each country can gain from trade because their internal trade-offs between shoes and shirts are (37) The less-efficient country has a comparative ad vantage in shirts, so it (38) it more efficient to produce shirts and trade them to the more-efficient country for shoes. Without trade, its (39) per shoe was 2 shirts; by trading, its cost per shoe can reduce to as low as 1 shirt depending on how much trade occurs. The more-(40) country has a comparative advantage in shoes, so it can gain in efficiency by moving some workers from shirt-production to shoe-production and trading some shoes for shirts. Without trade, its cost to make a shirt was 1 shoe; by trading, its cost per shirt can go as low as 1/2 shoe depending on how much trade occurs.
The net benefits to each country are called the gains from trade.