by Summary:
So what are the problems according to Blanchard and Summers? In their view, “the events of the last ten years have put into question the presumption that economies are self stabilizing, have raised again the issue of whether temporary shocks can have permanent effects, and have shown the importance of non linearities.” Only mainstream macroeconomists could possibly have thought that capitalism is self stabilizing. The rest of us—who have read Marx and Keynes as well as the work of Robert Clower, Hyman Minsky, and Axel Leijonhufvud—actually knew something about the roots of capitalist instability: the various ways a monetary commodity-producing economy might (but not necessarily) generate imbalances and instabilities based on the normal workings of the system. Yes, of course, temporary
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important: capitalism, Larry Summers, Olivier Blanchard, Rethinking Macroeconomic Policy
This could be interesting, too:
So what are the problems according to Blanchard and Summers? In their view, “the events of the last ten years have put into question the presumption that economies are self stabilizing, have raised again the issue of whether temporary shocks can have permanent effects, and have shown the importance of non linearities.” Only mainstream macroeconomists could possibly have thought that capitalism is self stabilizing. The rest of us—who have read Marx and Keynes as well as the work of Robert Clower, Hyman Minsky, and Axel Leijonhufvud—actually knew something about the roots of capitalist instability: the various ways a monetary commodity-producing economy might (but not necessarily) generate imbalances and instabilities based on the normal workings of the system. Yes, of course, temporary
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important: capitalism, Larry Summers, Olivier Blanchard, Rethinking Macroeconomic Policy
This could be interesting, too:
Joel Eissenberg writes Capitalism prevails
Daniel Becker writes Our relationship of work, technology and life
Mike Norman writes My new podcast episode is out
Matias Vernengo writes On the Worldly Philosophy at Radio UNAL
So what are the problems according to Blanchard and Summers? In their view, “the events of the last ten years have put into question the presumption that economies are self stabilizing, have raised again the issue of whether temporary shocks can have permanent effects, and have shown the importance of non linearities.”
Only mainstream macroeconomists could possibly have thought that capitalism is self stabilizing. The rest of us—who have read Marx and Keynes as well as the work of Robert Clower, Hyman Minsky, and Axel Leijonhufvud—actually knew something about the roots of capitalist instability: the various ways a monetary commodity-producing economy might (but not necessarily) generate imbalances and instabilities based on the normal workings of the system.
Yes, of course, temporary shocks can have permanent effects. How could they not, when tens of millions of people are thrown out of work and, especially in the wake of the most recent crash, inequality has soared to new heights?
And then there are those “non linearities,” the idea that financial crises are characterized by feedback effects such that shocks, even small ones, “are strongly amplified rather than damped as they propagate.” Bank runs are the quintessential example—whether customers demanding their deposits in the first Great Depression or the run on financial institutions (including insurance companies that issued credit default swaps) that occurred in the midst of the second Great Depression. But that’s not all: when corporations, facing a declining profit rate, choose to sell but not purchase, they make individually rational decisions that can have large-scale social ramifications—for workers, indebted households, and other corporations (on both Main Street and Wall Street).
So mainstream macroeconomists appear to be waking up from their slumber and seeing capitalism as it is—and as it has functioned for 150 years or so.Moreover, the reason that conventional economists are concerned is not economics but politics. Capitalism is not working and the result is social dysfunction that is creating a political backlash against not only politicians but also economists. I suspect that if this were not happening, everything would be just fine. Even so, they are not actually questioning basic assumptions, the adverse consequences of which heterodox economists and political theorists have pointed out from many different angles.
Occasional Links & Commentary
Laughter is the best medicine
David F. Ruccio | Professor of Economics, University of Notre Dame
The real sea change is the third one -- the reconsideration of what recessions really are. Most modern econ theories posit that recessions arrive randomly, instead of as the result of pressures that build up over time. And they assume that recessions are short-lived affairs that go away of their own accord. If these assumptions are wrong, then most of the theories written down in macroeconomics journals over the past several decades -- and most of those being written as we speak -- are of questionable usefulness....Bloomberg View
Fixing Macroeconomics Will Be Really Hard
Noah Smith, columnist