Joseph Schumpeter, economic growth, and creative destruction
15 Nov 2014 Leave a comment
in applied price theory, comparative institutional analysis, entrepreneurship, liberalism, theory of the firm Tags: creative destruction, Joseph Schumpeter
The Twitter Left is replacing the Left over Left
14 Nov 2014 Leave a comment
in comparative institutional analysis, liberalism, Marxist economics, politics, politics - Australia, politics - New Zealand, politics - USA, technological progress Tags: Leftover Left, Twitter left
An Open Letter to Paul Krugman | David K. Levine
31 Oct 2014 3 Comments
in budget deficits, business cycles, comparative institutional analysis, economics of religion, fiscal policy, global financial crisis (GFC), great recession, macroeconomics
Deirdre McCloskey on the point at which economic analysis can stop, and not before
31 Oct 2014 Leave a comment
Deirdre McCloskey on the fatal conceit
30 Oct 2014 Leave a comment
in applied price theory, applied welfare economics, comparative institutional analysis, development economics, entrepreneurship, liberalism Tags: Deirdre McCloskey, The fatal conceit, The pretence to knowledge
HT: Cafe Hayek
How on earth did this guy get to become French Minister of Finance? Shades of Roger Douglas?
28 Oct 2014 Leave a comment
Piketty on inequality: views of the IGM economic experts
16 Oct 2014 Leave a comment
in applied price theory, applied welfare economics, comparative institutional analysis, constitutional political economy, discrimination, economic growth, entrepreneurship, gender, human capital, income redistribution, industrial organisation, labour economics, Marxist economics, Rawls and Nozick Tags: Daron Acemoglu, James Robinson, Piketty, poverty and inequality, The Great Enrichment
Question: The most powerful force pushing towards greater wealth inequality in the US since the 1970s is the gap between the after-tax return on capital and the economic growth rate?
Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson have a simple explanation for why Piketty is wrong:
But like Marx, Piketty goes wrong for a very simple reason. The quest for general laws of capitalism or any economic system is misguided because it is a-institutional.
It ignores that it is the institutions and the political equilibrium of a society that determine how technology evolves, how markets function, and how the gains from various different economic arrangements are distributed.
Despite his erudition, ambition, and creativity, Marx was ultimately led astray because of his disregard of institutions and politics. The same is true of Piketty.
In the 1950s, George Stigler wanted to break up US steel because it had too much market power
15 Oct 2014 Leave a comment
in applied price theory, comparative institutional analysis, George Stigler, industrial organisation, political change Tags: george stigler, The pretence to knowledge
HT: David Henderson
Utopia, you are standing in it! 
Recent Comments