This book honours Professor John McCombie’s retirement by exploring a variety of themes, theories and debates in non-orthodox macroeconomics. With contributions from leading scholars, the book covers diverse ground in economic thought, policy, empirical work and modelling. It demonstrates ongoing presumptions and asks probing questions of topical questions from the increase of income equality to the international variation of productivity investment. This collection will appeal to academics and students with an interest in the history of macroeconomic thinking.
An argument that conceiving of economic value as a social force makes it possible to develop a new and more powerful theory of market behavior. With the advent of the 2007–2008 financial crisis, the economics profession itself entered into a crisis of legitimacy from which it has yet to emerge. Despite the obviousness of their failures, however, economists continue to rely on the same methods and to proceed from the same underlying assumptions. André Orléan challenges the neoclassical paradigm in this book, with a new way of thinking about perhaps its most fundamental concept, economic value. Orléan argues that value is not bound up with labor, or utility, or any other property that preexists market exchange. Economic value, he contends, is a social force whose vast sphere of influence, amounting to a kind of empire, extends to every aspect of economic life. Markets are based on the identification of value with money, and exchange value can only be regarded as a social institution. Financial markets, for example, instead of defining an extrinsic, objective value for securities, act as a mechanism for arriving at a reference price that will be accepted by all investors. What economists must therefore study, Orléan urges, is the hold that value has over individuals and how it shapes their perceptions and behavior. Awarded the prestigious Prix Paul Ricoeur on its original publication in France in 2011, The Empire of Value has been substantially revised and enlarged for this edition, with an entirely new section discussing the financial crisis of 2007–2008.
From the 30 year General Glut debate at the start of the 19th century which focused solely on its truth, to the Keynesian revolution and Keynes's successful attempt to convince his fellow economists that Say's Law was wrong, it remains the most controversial principle in the history of economic theory. The central question - not resolved to this day - is this: can demand deficiency ever be the cause of recession and, if so, are greater levels of unproductive spending an appropriate response? The thrust of the argument is that if Say's Law is valid, much of modern macroeconomic theory is fatally flawed. This book explores the validity of this problematic principle, reminding us that this 200-year debate has not yet been laid to rest.
This book is concerned with the application of economic theory to problems of international economic policy. For most of his life the author has been employed as a national or international official in London and Washington, in makers of economic policy.
The construction and the role of the economic canon, the accepted list of great works and great authors, has been the subject of much recent literary and historical debate. By contrast, the concept of the canon has been largely dormant in the study of the history of economics, with the canonical sequence of Smith, Ricardo, Marx, etc. constituting t
In the early 1980s, rational expectations and new classical economics dominated macroeconomic theory. This essay evolved from theauthors' profound disagreement with that trend. It demonstrates notonly how the new classical view got macroeconomics wrong, but also howto go about doing macroeconomics the right way.
Trade, Stability, and Macroeconomics: Essays in Honor of Lloyd A. Metzler provides information pertinent to the fundamental aspects of trade, stability, and macroeconomics. This book covers a variety of topics, including nontraded and intermediate commodities, prices, production, exchange rates, and wages. Organized into five parts encompassing 22 chapters, this book begins with an overview of the theory of international trade and the effect of a tariff or export tax on domestic prices. This text then defines the supply of the international commodities as a function of their prices and of the output of the domestic commodity. Other chapters consider the Stolper–Samuelson analysis of the effects of protection of the distribution of income. This book discusses as well the theory of external–internal balance or the assignment problem as related to macroeconomic policy in an open economy. The final chapter deals with the dynamic allocation of scarce resources. This book is a valuable resource for economists.
How modern economics abandoned classical liberalism and lost its way Milton Friedman once predicted that advances in scientific economics would resolve debates about whether raising the minimum wage is good policy. Decades later, Friedman’s prediction has not come true. In Where Economics Went Wrong, David Colander and Craig Freedman argue that it never will. Why? Because economic policy, when done correctly, is an art and a craft. It is not, and cannot be, a science. The authors explain why classical liberal economists understood this essential difference, why modern economists abandoned it, and why now is the time for the profession to return to its classical liberal roots. Carefully distinguishing policy from science and theory, classical liberal economists emphasized values and context, treating economic policy analysis as a moral science where a dialogue of sensibilities and judgments allowed for the same scientific basis to arrive at a variety of policy recommendations. Using the University of Chicago—one of the last bastions of classical liberal economics—as a case study, Colander and Freedman examine how both the MIT and Chicago variants of modern economics eschewed classical liberalism in their attempt to make economic policy analysis a science. By examining the way in which the discipline managed to lose its bearings, the authors delve into such issues as the development of welfare economics in relation to economic science, alternative voices within the Chicago School, and exactly how Friedman got it wrong. Contending that the division between science and prescription needs to be restored, Where Economics Went Wrong makes the case for a more nuanced and self-aware policy analysis by economists.
This volume brings together papers inspired by the work of Duncan Foley, an extraordinarily productive economist who has made seminal contributions to a wide variety of areas. Foley’s work cannot be easily classified, but one thread that runs through it is a critical examination (along both ethical and analytical lines) of conventional neoclassical economic theory, particularly involving general equilibrium theories of value and money. Foley was a pioneer of complexity economics as well, which adopts approaches to these questions drawn from natural sciences, so the collection therefore has an interdisciplinary quality that will interest a wide variety of readers. Some of the chapters are intellectual biographies that contextualize and identify Foley’s contributions to Keynesian macroeconomics, Marxian value theory, and complexity theory in economics. The topics covered include the economics of complexity; the ethics of general equilibrium theory; the economics of climate change; applications of Keynesian, Marxian and Ricardian political economy; and money and financial crises. The collection should be useful to scholars who work in various economic traditions critical of the currently dominant free-market approach, but it also speaks to scholars of critical theory in various disciplines beyond economics such as the mathematicians, physicists, and other natural scientists who are interested in understanding the complexity of social processes using their analytical frameworks. This book should also appeal to graduate students in economics who are working in these traditions, as well as scholars (including current graduate students in orthodox programs) who are dissatisfied with the current state of economic theory and would like to satisfy their intellectual curiosity by sampling the contributions of critical theorists.
