by Summary:
Perhaps, perhaps, this crisis marks an end of the “neoliberal era”.The word “neoliberal” immediately provokes contention, but let’s not get fancy or upset here. For our purposes, neoliberalism is just a set of social heuristics: 1) that markets are in general the most capable institution for organizing human affairs; 2) that therefore, absent strong reasons to the contrary, use of market or market-like institutions should be maximized, “completed”, expanded even into domains heretofore intentionally insulated from them; and 3) that other institutions, including the state, should take a supportive, even subservient role: filling in gaps (“safety net”), addressing “market failures” that are presumed to be rare rather than pervasive, and only when a high burden of proof has been met. Any
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important:
This could be interesting, too:
Perhaps, perhaps, this crisis marks an end of the “neoliberal era”.The word “neoliberal” immediately provokes contention, but let’s not get fancy or upset here. For our purposes, neoliberalism is just a set of social heuristics: 1) that markets are in general the most capable institution for organizing human affairs; 2) that therefore, absent strong reasons to the contrary, use of market or market-like institutions should be maximized, “completed”, expanded even into domains heretofore intentionally insulated from them; and 3) that other institutions, including the state, should take a supportive, even subservient role: filling in gaps (“safety net”), addressing “market failures” that are presumed to be rare rather than pervasive, and only when a high burden of proof has been met. Any
Topics:
Mike Norman considers the following as important:
This could be interesting, too:
New Economics Foundation writes Building hope
New Economics Foundation writes Are oil and gas workers the coalminers of our generation?
Mike Norman writes Tariffs As A Fiscal Tool? — Brian Romanchuk
John Quiggin writes Trump’s dictatorship is a fait accompli
Perhaps, perhaps, this crisis marks an end of the “neoliberal era”.
The word “neoliberal” immediately provokes contention, but let’s not get fancy or upset here. For our purposes, neoliberalism is just a set of social heuristics: 1) that markets are in general the most capable institution for organizing human affairs; 2) that therefore, absent strong reasons to the contrary, use of market or market-like institutions should be maximized, “completed”, expanded even into domains heretofore intentionally insulated from them; and 3) that other institutions, including the state, should take a supportive, even subservient role: filling in gaps (“safety net”), addressing “market failures” that are presumed to be rare rather than pervasive, and only when a high burden of proof has been met. Any other intervention is a “distortion” to be avoided at all costs....
I would define "neoliberalism" somewhat differently. This "definition" would serve as a definition of economic liberalism, whereas neoliberalism is a distinct form of economic liberalism that doesn't only advocate a market-based state but also a market based world economy in which states are captured by private financial and economic interests and turned to the advantage of the ownership class, especially the upper rungs that is sometime characterized as the "corporate class" and the "billionaire class."
That is to say, economic liberalism seeks to reduce the role of the state and replace it with markets. Classical liberalism as an aspect of economic liberalism viewed the role of the state as "nightwatchman." Neoliberalism as an aspect of economic liberalism recognizes the power of the state and seeks to suborn it by diverting policy from serving public purpose ("the common good and general welfare") and directing it toward serving special interests.
This has become especially pronounced in an environment where political liberalism conflicts with economic liberalism and the majority must be convinced to vote against their own interests. This is accomplished by the translation of wealth into power.
The great disadvantage in the study of economics presently is the ignoring of the influence and affect of asymmetric wealth and the economic and political power that derives from it. The basis of economic liberalism is supposedly "perfect markets" unaffected by asymmetries, e.g., or information and power. Neoliberalism is based on using those asymmetries of power to influence and affect policy.
Neoliberalism is as much a political theory as an economic one. Politics and economics are joined at the hip, and arguably politics, which determines institutional arrangements and operations, is more causative than the so-called natural laws of economics like supply and demand, and rational maximization.
SRW addresses the challenges that are now emerging owing to the breakdown of "normal" and uncertainty about a new normal. Will these asymmetries be addressed and how might they be?
Four functions of markets
Steve Randy Waldman