When Galbraith Frightened Conservatives: Power in Economics,Economists’ Power,and Scientificity

In this article, I first expound John Kenneth Galbraith’s general theory of power. Galbraith always took into account phenomena of power in economics, and shed light on the power of economists in particular. I then show how the reaction of conservatives to the broadcasting of the Age of Uncertainty highlights the relevance of Galbraith’s theory. Letters exchanged by conservative Lords in an effort to fight against Galbraith’s ideas paradoxically illustrate his theory. This leads to questions about the status of economists, popularizers, and experts. Finally, I argue that convictions have a crucial role in scientific production, and that Robert Solow’s distinction between the “serious scholars” and the proselyte economist is irrelevant because of its incapacity to understand how economists produce knowledge.     

Guy Routh's Heterodox Critique of Economic Methodology

Guy Routh was an outstandingly incisive and severe critic of mainstream economic theory's abstraction, class bias, and empirical irrelevance. Routh's The Origin of Economic Ideas (1975 1989), with such chapter titles as “The Preposterous Origins” and “From Propaganda to Dogma”, was described by Robert Heilbroner as “irreverent, original, controversial, and delightful” while J. K. Galbraith expressed his “utmost enjoyment” and “utmost approval” of the book. Routh's trenchant critique of mainstream theorizing and his vision of an empirically-grounded alternative have been largely forgotten since his death in 1993, but deserve the attention of heterodox and especially of institutionalist and social economists.     

Institutionalism and the “Common Man” Through the Lens of Philip Klein: Business Cycles,the Public Sector,and Keynes’s Economics

This article reviews and assesses Philip Klein’s work on business cycles and macroeconomics, the public sector, and the economics of John Maynard Keynes. The article makes several findings. First, Klein built on the pioneering efforts of Wesley Mitchell to advance the development of cycle indicators and to outline an eclectic theory of cycles that remains useful for synthesizing a broad literature. Second, Klein’s essays on macroeconomics contain enduring discussions of the malleability of the “natural” rate of unemployment and the value of a behavioral approach to expectations. Third, he refocused the institutionalist attention on the public sector by introducing “higher efficiency” and other concepts to help explain how government policy plays a role in economic life. Fourth, Klein emphasized the role of fiscal policy in moderating business cycles. Fifth, his work points in the direction of today’s post-Keynesian institutionalism, both by stressing that Keynes was “profoundly institutionalist” in his approach and by arguing that conjoining Keynes and institutionalism would provide a stronger foundation for macroeconomic theory and policy.     

Economics in Institutional Perspective,Memorial Essays in Honor of K. William Kapp

In the past, the standard discussions of market failures in economics textbooks confined themselves to issues involving externalities, public goods, and common property (open access). Subsequent to George Akerlof’s famous article “The Market for ‘Lemons,’” discussions of the problems created by asymmetric information gradually became standard fare, but the issues raised by thinking of asymmetric information in economic matters extend far beyond the used car and health insurance markets that are normally used as the paradigm cases. In fact, consideration of the problems of information will inevitably lead to an examination of the problems of market manipulation and fraud, especially in light of the 2008 financial crisis. Akerlof has travelled this path himself as indicated by his recent book with Robert Shiller, Phishing for Phools (2015). Akerlof and Shiller provide a litany of examples of manipulation and deception in advertising and in many markets including financial markets. They also have a chapter on “The Resistance and its Heroes” that highlights some of the people and agencies that have worked to expose and reduce phishing, but this chapter is remarkably sparse. What this article attempts to do is to fill out some of this history by focusing on the work of American institutional economists from Veblen to Galbraith, who critically examined the issues of manipulation and deception in advertising, salesmanship, and finance. Some general considerations relating to the problem of fraud are also discussed.     

United States income inequality: The concept of countervailing power revisited

This article uses some of the conceptual infrastructure associated with J.K. Galbraith’s “countervailing power” argument to explore the deep history of U.S. income inequality. Two explanatory variables—institutional power and distributive conflict—have played an integral role in the shifting patterns of U.S. income inequality since the late nineteenth century. The “commodified” power of large firms, manifested in aggregate concentration and the markup, exacerbates inequality while the “countervailing” power of organized labor, manifested in union density and strike activity, mitigates inequality. One implication of this research is that U.S. income inequality is unlikely to diminish unless the labor movement (or a comparable social movement) is strengthened.     

Public Policy Adrift: Veblen’s Blind Drift and Neoliberalism

This paper considers the factors that currently shape and direct public policy formation in the United States. The paper begins by articulating the general position of institutionalists with regard to the purpose of public policy analysis and formulation. Next, a discussion of Thorstein Veblen’s view is presented focusing on his rejection of meliorative tendencies in the economy and the meaning of his concept of blind drift as applied to the likely direction of ongoing social processes. Then, we explore a contemporary analysis of the belief in the role of meliorative trends in contemporary social and economic policy analysis and discussions by James K. Galbraith. Then, we examine Philip Mirowski’s recent analysis of the shaping of the direction of public policy debate by what he refers to as the neoliberal thought collective as a mitigating factor to the blind drift suggested by Thorstein Veblen.     

Old (Chicago) school,new century: the link between Knight and Simons’ Chicago plan to Buchanan’s constitutional money

James Buchanan had long been a champion of the early Chicago school’s emphasis on the essential role that institutions play in framing the market process. In his post-2009 analysis of the financial crisis, Buchanan echoed his old Chicago mentors like Frank Knight and Henry Simons in arguing that the Great Recession, like all previous financial crises, was primarily a failure of the rules governing our monetary-financial system. This “old Chicago” emphasis on the institutional “rules of the game” formed the basis of his essential post-2009 argument that the financial crisis fundamentally represented not a market failure, per say, but a constitutional failure. In this paper, I connect the dots in Buchanan’s post-2009 analysis of the Great Recession and his reaffirmation of the need for “constitutional money” to his old Chicago mentor’s strikingly similar calls for a radical restructuring of the monetary-financial system in the Chicago Plan of the 1930s. Though Buchanan’s twenty-first century resurrection of these ideas has yet to conjure up the academic support of his predecessors, certain elements of his “old school” monetary-financial reforms have experienced a strong revival since the financial crisis, as has Buchanan’s more general call to “constitutionalize money.”     

Work and consumption in an era of unbalanced technological advance

Keynes’s “Grandchildren” essay famously predicted both a rapid increase in productivity and a sharp shrinkage of the workweek – to 15 h – over the century from 1930. Keynes was right (so far) about output per capita, but wrong about the workweek. The key reason is that he failed to allow for changing distribution. With widening inequality, median income (and therefore the income of most families) has risen, and is now rising, much more slowly than he anticipated. The failure of the workweek to shrink as he predicted follows. Other factors, including habit formation, socially induced consumption preferences, and network effects are part of the story too. Combining the analysis of Keynes, Meade and Galbraith suggests a way forward for economic policy under the prevailing circumstances.     

Economic Institutions and the Satisfaction of Human Needs

This article examines John Kenneth Galbraith’s contributions to the field of economic development. Galbraith’s works on economic development were numerous, but they remain largely ignored by his critics and fans alike. He approached the economic development problem with a keen understanding of both the economic and political forces shaping the development debate. Galbraith’s contributions to development economics were always focused on how to get the job done. Doing so required different strategies in an exceedingly diverse community of nations. His work remains relevant. The literature is only now beginning to recognize that this holistic approach to development is a necessary alternative to single-causation theories of world poverty. Galbraith’s approach to development problems is consistent with (and perhaps inspired by) original institutional economics (OIE) in the tradition of Thorstein Veblen and Clarence Ayres.     

R. H. Tawney as Political Economist

The paper argues along the lines of John Kenneth Galbraith in his analysis of the American “affluent society” during the “Golden Age,” when social unbalance between private wealth and public services was expanded by modern capitalism. In industrialized or developing economies, investment in public services was constrained by fiscal or ideological reasons favoring market provision. This evolution had significant impact on welfare.     

Political aspects of the capital controversies and capitalist crises

The Cambridge controversies about the theory of capital were ultimately underpinned by a clash between two different visions of capitalism, the neoclassical view, according to which distribution depends on the supply and demand curves of capital and labor, and the post Keynesian view, according to which distribution depends on political and institutional factors instead. I shall argue that the distinction between “meritocratic capitalism” and “patrimonial capitalism,” which underpins the discussions surrounding Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the Twenty-First Century, is also connected to those two different visions of capitalism, which were behind the Cambridge controversies. These two visions of capitalism have important implications for our understanding of political power over workers, and also to our understanding of political power over land and its natural resources. The role of land and natural resources was not discussed in the Cambridge controversies, but is addressed in Piero Sraffa’s Production of Commodities, and is implied in Piketty’s inclusion of land in his definition of capital, which brings in a geographical dimension to our understanding of capitalism and capitalist crises, as I shall argue.     

Solving the U.S. Trade Deficit and Competitiveness Problem

We compare the analytical approach of John R. Common and Ronald H. Coase to institutional analysis and social provisioning. In particular, we examine their similarities in (i) the definition and role of institutions in the economy, (ii) the allocative (social provisioning) role of institutions in the economy, and (iii) the inescapable and unchanging role of institutions in shaping the social provisioning process. We contend that Commons and Coase had more in common than did Coase and many of his followers in the “new institutional economics.” In particular, the two had strong similarities in both (a) their insights into the nature of institutions in the legal-economic nexus that is the foundation of the economy and (b) their methods for conducting economics research. Because this role of institutional evolution is, as Warren Samuels noted, an inescapable and unchanging part of an economy’s social provisioning process, it will remain an integral part of any such work in the future, regardless of the “school of analysis” or methodological approach.     

A social morality for mortals: A review essay of <Emphasis Type="Italic">the order of public reason: A theory of freedom and morality in a diverse and bounded world</Emphasis>

This essay praises Gerald Gaus’s The Order of Public Reason as a building block for all normative explorations into the institutional foundations of human sociability. It evaluates the normative implications put forth by Gaus in terms of the Kirzner’s “finder’s keeper’s ethic.” This raises a question about the relationship between the moral order and the political order that underlies market processes. Examining the role of entrepreneurship in the market process in relation to Kirzner’s “finder’s keeper’s principle” suggests a deeper ethical foundation that underpins the institutional conditions of “social morality.”     

Will the MEGA2 edition be a watershed in interpreting Marx?

Abstract

The MEGA² edition is a watershed in interpreting important aspects of Marx’s oeuvre, but not all of them. It provides hints as to why Marx failed to complete his magnum opus, Capital, and informs about his doubts regarding the “law of motion” of capitalism centred on the “law of the falling tendency of the rate of profit” he was keen to establish.     

司马迁的因俗以治思想及其现实镜鉴?

作为一种非正式制度,习俗在国家的社会经济发展和治理中起着非常重要的作用,在我国的古代社会尤其如此。司马迁较早注意到了俗与治的内在关联,但学术界忽视了其在司马迁经济思想中的重要地位。文章对司马迁的经济思想谱系中“俗”与“治”两大重要范畴进行了关联阐述,介绍了司马迁“因俗以治”治道思想的源流和主张,并结合现代经济学理论对其进行延伸与扩展,探讨其现实意义。研究发现：(1)司马迁的治道思想兼容了道家与儒家的无为而治思想的不同侧面,而其“善因论”的要义正在于“俗之所欲,因而予之”。(2)因俗以治的核心是因循人“生有欲”和“皆为利”的本性及民间习俗来因地制宜、因时制宜地立俗施事,以达至“事少而功多”的理想治理效果。(3)由于司马迁的经济思想带有浓厚的经验色彩和朴素性质,而且中国古代社会缺乏良好的市场环境,因此其在近代以前始终未得到重视和采纳。(4)司马迁“因俗以治”思想给现代国家治理带来了众多启示：一是要尊重风俗习惯并加以因势利导;二是要注重习俗等非正式制度与正式制度的兼容;三是要让好的习俗成为一种稳态均衡而固定下来并延续下去。文章不仅是对司马迁经济思想研究的丰富和拓展,而且对中国国家治理能力的提升也提供了有益的历史借鉴。     

The value and security of money. Metallic and fiduciary media in Ferdinando Galiani's Della moneta

This paper proposes a new interpretative framework for Galiani's monetary theory. The main argument is that, by adopting “the methodology of successive approximations” (correctly attributed to him by Luigi Einaudi), Galiani investigated the theoretical foundations of the two archetypal moneys: metallic money and paper money. On these foundations, he developed the model of a complex monetary economy based on the coexistence of a metallic and a fiduciary circulation. The paper also illustrates how the experience of the “public banks” of Naples inspired his analysis, thus shedding new light on the theoretical and institutional richness of his monetary thought.     

美欧创新型国家评价体系分析

美国信息技术与创新基金会的创新竞争力评价指标体系由6个一级指标、16个二级指标构杨,其指标"经济绩效"和"创新能力"是影响国家竞争力的最重要因素;欧盟推出《创新联盟记分牌》,旨在发现欧盟成员国研究和创新体系的相对优劣势,帮助成员国认识自身实力,集中力量提高创新绩效;欧洲工商管理学院推出《全球创新指数》,强调创新环境、基础设施以及相关成果的测度和评价。国外创新测度对于我国开展创新型国家评价具有重要借鉴意义:创新型国家测度的关键是创新绩效测度,应以事实型数据为基础,并根据形势变化不断调整评价指标和体系。     

蒋介石与雅尔塔协定的再认识

抗战胜利前夕，蒋介石为何接受有损国家利益的雅尔塔协定？对此，本文认为传统定论“蒋介石以苏联放弃支持中共为交换条件”的说法过于简单化，有过度意识形态化之嫌疑，更重要的是它还遮蔽了历史的男一面。本文以蒋介石日记以及相关史料为依据，详细考察了蒋介石对侍雅尔塔协定的思想言行、立场，以及采取的相应对策，以重新认识蒋介石与雅尔塔协定之问题。