Economics,Democracy, and the Distribution of Capital Ownership

This article holds that widespread, practical access to capital acquisition is essential for sustainable widespread economic prosperity and democracy. The founders of the U.S.A. agreed that sustainable democracy required widespread ownership of land to provide a viable earning capacity sufficient to support robust participation in democratic government. The importance of widespread land ownership to individual prosperity and sustainable democracy was supported not only by the prevailing philosophical views of property, it was also apparent to the common man and woman. Compared to Europe, America offered widespread access to land ownership, higher wages, better work conditions, cheaper staples and greater individual freedom, equal opportunity, prosperity, and political participation. This conviction that widespread access to ownership is a necessary condition for widespread prosperity and sustainable democracy continued throughout most of the nineteenth century, but today public discourse reveals virtually no trace of this once universally held opinion. This article suggests that the disappearance of this conviction can be traced to an erroneous view shaped by neoclassical economics and Keynesian economics. According to this view, (1) the disappearance of the American frontier and industrialization made the goal of widespread capital ownership either impractical or of little or no economic significance and (2) by way of technological advance, sufficient earning capacity and consumer demand to promote growth and sustain democracy can be achieved, without widespread ownership, primarily through jobs and welfare. Although differing in many respects, both mainstream schools, along with Adam Smith’s classical economics, share one common but unstated economic assumption: the broader distribution of capital acquisition (in itself) has no fundamental relationship to the fuller employment of people and capital, the broader distribution of greater individual earning capacity, and growth. Contemporary thinking, shaped by these economic schools, also tacitly assumes that widespread capital ownership is not essential for the sustainable individual earning capacity needed to support robust democracy. This erroneous “ownership-neutrality assumption” (1) contradicts both the views of America’s founders and the colonial experience, and (2) provides theoretical justification for structuring capital markets and capital acquisition transactions to unfairly and dysfunctionally favor existing owners at the expense of broader ownership distribution, more widely shared prosperity, greater efficiency, ecologically friendly growth, and a vital democracy. America’s conscientious founders would be shocked by the diminished importance of the distribution of ownership in the mainstream analysis of prices, efficiency, production, growth, and democracy. Rather than enhancing democracy, they would view the “ownership-neutrality assumption” of mainstream economics as contributing to its deterioration and corruption. They would openly search for economic analysis built on an alternate assumption more consistent with their understanding of the requisite conditions for sustainable democracy. This article advances an economic analysis that suspends the ownership-neutrality assumption, replaces it with a “broader-ownership-growth assumption,” and suggests a voluntary market strategy for substantially broadening capital ownership, enhancing individual earning capacity, and providing the widespread economic prosperity needed for robust democracy.     

Broadening the Right to Acquire Capital with the Earnings of Capital: the Missing Link to Sustainable Economic Recovery and Growth

This article presents a proposal to broaden the right to acquire capital with the earnings of capital as a means of promoting sustainable economic recovery and growth. It would open the markets for real and financial capital acquisition more fully and competitively to poor and working people (1) to distribute more broadly the earnings of capital and (2) to profitably employ more capital and labor. Both the recession and the strategies advanced to promote economic recovery may be viewed as responses to the prospect of inadequate present and future earning capacity of both consumers and producers (1) to purchase what can physically be produced and (2) to repay existent and anticipated debt obligations. To increase the prospects of sufficient, sustainable earning capacity, the proposal advanced in this article would extend to all people the same protections and benefits presently provided by government that facilitate market transactions whereby capital is acquired with the earnings of capital primarily for well-capitalized people. Although in theory, all people in a market economy are able to acquire capital with the earnings of capital, reliable empirical data reveal that as a practical matter, the major determinant of the ability of individuals to acquire capital with the earnings of capital is the existing distribution of capital ownership. The theory of “binary” economic growth underlying this proposal holds that the market return on capital is positively related to the distribution of capital acquisition with the earnings of capital. The prospect of a broader distribution of capital acquisition with the earnings of capital carries with it the prospect of more broadly distributed earning capacity in future years, which in turn will provide the market incentives to profitably employ more capital and labor in earlier years. The idea that the broader distribution of capital acquisition with the earnings of capital will promote growth is not found in any of the widely accepted theories and models of economic growth such as those proposed by Schumpeter, Solow, Roemer, and Lucas. By opening to all people the institutions of corporate finance, banking, insurance, government loans and guaranties, and monetary policy (the very institutions presently relied upon by the Federal Government to stimulate the economy) the practical ability to acquire capital with the earnings of capital can be more broadly extended to all people with the result that greatly enhanced prospects for greater and more broadly distributed earning capacity and growth can be reasonably expected and realized by all.     

Macroeconomic stability and economic justice

This article presents a proposal to broaden the right to acquire capital with the earnings of capital as a means of promoting sustainable economic recovery and growth. It would open the markets for real and financial capital acquisition more fully and competitively to poor and working people (1) to distribute more broadly the earnings of capital and (2) to profitably employ more capital and labor. Both the recession and the strategies advanced to promote economic recovery may be viewed as responses to the prospect of inadequate present and future earning capacity of both consumers and producers (1) to purchase what can physically be produced and (2) to repay existent and anticipated debt obligations. To increase the prospects of sufficient, sustainable earning capacity, the proposal advanced in this article would extend to all people the same protections and benefits presently provided by government that facilitate market transactions whereby capital is acquired with the earnings of capital primarily for well-capitalized people. Although in theory, all people in a market economy are able to acquire capital with the earnings of capital, reliable empirical data reveal that as a practical matter, the major determinant of the ability of individuals to acquire capital with the earnings of capital is the existing distribution of capital ownership. The theory of “binary” economic growth underlying this proposal holds that the market return on capital is positively related to the distribution of capital acquisition with the earnings of capital. The prospect of a broader distribution of capital acquisition with the earnings of capital carries with it the prospect of more broadly distributed earning capacity in future years, which in turn will provide the market incentives to profitably employ more capital and labor in earlier years. The idea that the broader distribution of capital acquisition with the earnings of capital will promote growth is not found in any of the widely accepted theories and models of economic growth such as those proposed by Schumpeter, Solow, Roemer, and Lucas. By opening to all people the institutions of corporate finance, banking, insurance, government loans and guaranties, and monetary policy (the very institutions presently relied upon by the Federal Government to stimulate the economy) the practical ability to acquire capital with the earnings of capital can be more broadly extended to all people with the result that greatly enhanced prospects for greater and more broadly distributed earning capacity and growth can be reasonably expected and realized by all.     

A Behavioral Analysis of Technological Change in the Computer Industry, 1930–1950

This article presents a binary economic critique of Milton Friedman's thesis that a competitive, free market, private enterprise, capitalist system is an essential condition for freedom. After identifying deficiencies in Friedman's understanding of private property and economics, this article explains how a market economy based on Friedman's flawed understanding concentrates economic power in a plutocracy, perpetuates chronic underemployment of labor and capital, and suppresses the freedom of most people. It advances a "binary economic approach" to create a more productive and democratic market system characterized by greater, more sustainable, and more widely-distributed prosperity, economic power, and individual freedom than prevails in any existing capitalist economy.     

The <Emphasis Type="Italic">Acting</Emphasis> Person: Social Capital and Sustainable Development

Ron Stanfield has had a long and distinguished career as a social economist and commentator on the social economy. Of special concern to us in this article are Stanfield’s interests in social capital, sustainable development, and nurturance which we refer to as caring. We also take up several other virtues including sympathy, benevolence, and generosity that have been part of the economics literature from the time of Smith’s Moral Sentiments along with the associated vices of heartlessness, insensitivity, meanness, greediness, and others. This article attempts to show that (1) adding social capital to the machine-like individual of mainstream economics results in the acting person of personalist economics who becomes more fully a human person through social interactions that foster the development of several virtues or less fully a human person through other interactions that instill certain vices; and that (2) in matters relating to sustainability, becoming more fully a human person calls especially for the practice of the virtues of justice and moderation. In addition we have suggested a framework for thinking about sustainable development in terms of actuating and limiting principles and for developing critical values or performance standards for sustainable development that are person-centered.     

Social capital and social economics

The “discovery” of social capital in the early 1990s led to an upsurge of research into the economic impact of social cohesion and governmental effectiveness. This paper outlines key developments in the social capital literature over the past 13 years. It then examines theory and evidence of the links between social cohesion, quality of governance, economic performance and human welfare. The literature indicates that social capital makes a measurable contribution to economic development and overall wellbeing, particularly in developing countries. Partly in response to this emerging body of evidence, there has been increased interest in the application of community development principles to economic development initiatives. This paper argues that the advent of social capital theory represents a partial convergence between social economics and mainstream economics, and signifies an increased acceptance that economic activity cannot be meaningfully “disembedded” from social and political context.     

Economics for substantive democracy

In this paper, I sustain that the discourse of economics has become one of the most substantial contributors to the erosion of the democratic ideal. The first argument used in this case against economics concerns its attempt to be considered a neo-naturalistic science; the second, the fact that economics considers democracy contradictory to the expression of its scientific rationality and; the third, the fact that economics crowds out people from decision-making processes by pushing them into the hands of experts. Because partisan political programmes have essentially become economic programmes, economics should contribute to substantive democracy. In order to do so, an alternative discourse to mainstream economics must be proposed. An economics favourable to substantive democracy should, thereby, be political rather than naturalistic, pluralist rather than monist and, instead of crowding out people from decisions processes, should aim at the co-production of economic knowledge with those concerned by the outcome of economic decisions.     

Thinking Things Through: The Value and Limitations of James Buchanan's Public Choice Theory

Abstract

James Buchanan, one of the founders of Public Choice theory, applies the conceptual apparatus of economics to the public domain. This article investigates which assumptions are crucial to Buchanan's project, concentrating on methodological individualism and the Homo Economicus model. It shows that Buchanan from time to time moves away from these economic concepts, though only in minor ways. The article also focuses on Buchanan's normative emphasis on the role of institutions in coordinating self-interested individual actions in mutually beneficial ways. Criticizing Buchanan's analysis, the article argues that a broader view of the individual and of the role of institutions is necessary in a theory of constitutional choice.     

劳动者股份制——中国特色社会主义公有制的基本形式

马克思主义创始人的社会主义公有制理论,一方面阐明了社会主义公有制的本质特征,另一方面提出了社会主义公有制基本形式的经典模式———社会所有制;传统社会主义经济理论教条式地照搬马克思主义创始人的经典模式,确立了传统社会主义公有制基本形式———国家所有制。根据马克思主义基本原理和社会主义市场经济的客观要求,中国特色社会主义公有制的基本形式应当、而且只能是以劳动者个人产权社会化联合为基本特征的劳动者股份制。因此,应当在深入进行理论探讨和认真总结实践经验的基础上,全面实现社会主义公有制基本形式的理论创新和制度创新。     

Homo Economicus,AIs, humans and rats: decision-making and economic welfare

ABSTRACT

Critics of economics often highlight two related issues: the empirical falsity of the ‘homo economicus’ assumption of rational, self-interested maximisation; and the ethical consequences of models based on this assumption. Yet many experiments in biology show non-human creatures often seem to behave as if they were rational maximisers, suggesting that context rather than cognitive capacity is important for determining behaviour. The critique of rational choice poses a less serious methodological challenge to economics than is sometimes thought. However, economists do need to respond to the ethical critique that decisions and policies based on the assumption of rational self-interested maximisation change the norms of individual behaviour for the worse. This paper argues that economics has become divorced from ethics because for a century it has dealt only with ordinal, not cardinal, welfare rankings and has thus ruled out interpersonal comparisons. While enabling economists to separate normative from positive analysis, this separation protocol has left welfare economics both internally contradictory and unable to address major societal decisions, even though welfare economics is used constantly in limited ways, such as cost-benefit analysis. This separation reflects empirically inaccurate assumptions concerning preference formation and the conditions of supply and demand (but not the rational choice assumption) in the foundational welfare economic theorems. Economics must urgently revisit welfare economics, particularly in the context of modern economies in which individuals are increasingly interdependent, and the assumptions required for the fundamental welfare theorems therefore increasingly invalid.     

The Post-Apartheid Development Debacle in South Africa: How Mainstream Economics and the Vested Interests Preserved Apartheid Economic Structures

Nelson Mandela and the African National Congress (ANC) were persuaded by mainstream economists and South African businesses to pursue neoliberal policies. The ANC implemented policies that made South Africa more open to international trade and financial flows along with privatization and austerity, other than a modest increase in social expenditures. After twenty-three years of such policies, we can judge their effectiveness. Unfortunately, neoliberalism worsened the inequality created under apartheid and failed to stimulate significant growth and development. This article documents the extent to which the maintenance of key apartheid-era institutions, under the guise of “market friendly policies,” undermined the prospects for long-term economic and human development in South Africa. This post-apartheid development debacle should go down in history as one of the great failures of mainstream economics and its neoliberal policy recommendations. Breaking the cycle of uneven development in South Africa will require fundamental changes in institutions, including changes in democracy, ownership structures, and the very nature of the economic system. This article offers some ideas for how an adjusted institutional structure might reconfigure the social provisioning process in South Africa to address racial divisions and lingering inequality.     

The Economics of Regulating Cross-border Finance: Two New Views

For much of the 20th century the dominant view in macroeconomics was that cross-border finance needed to be regulated in order to balance the ‘impossible trinity’ first sketched by John Maynard Keynes in his two books on monetary theory. The dominant view in development economics during the same period was that cross-border capital flows need to be regulated for similar reasons but also to mobilize domestic resources for economic development. The view that capital mobility was something to be constrained fell out of favor in mainstream economics by the 1980s and 1990s. The experience of numerous financial crises in the past 20 years has spawned new economic theories that reintroduce the notion that cross-border finance can cause financial instability. One strand of new theory in this realm picks up from Ragnar Nurkse, Hyman Minsky, and others, and has become popular in many emerging market capitals and in the United Nations system. Another strand of new theory comes from modern welfare economics and is gaining ground in mainstream economics, central banks, and the Bretton Woods institutions. This paper examines these new breakthroughs and traces them to their origins in economic thought. Coupled with new econometric evidence on the efficacy of capital account regulation, the regulation of capital flows is justified now more than ever.     

Social capital and social economics

The “discovery” of social capital in the early 1990s led to an upsurge of research into the economic impact of social cohesion and governmental effectiveness. This paper outlines key developments in the social capital literature over the past 13 years. It then examines theory and evidence of the links between social cohesion, quality of governance, economic performance and human welfare. The literature indicates that social capital makes a measurable contribution to economic development and overall wellbeing, particularly in developing countries. Partly in response to this emerging body of evidence, there has been increased interest in the application of community development principles to economic development initiatives. This paper argues that the advent of social capital theory represents a partial convergence between social economics and mainstream economics, and signifies an increased acceptance that economic activity cannot be meaningfully “disembedded” from social and political context.     

Shackle,nihilism, and the subject of economics ∗

Shackle's economic theories have frequently been labelled ‘nihilistic’, and thus of dubious interest to economists. An examination of this charge reveals it to be meaningless. Through focusing on Nietzsche’s diagnosis of nihilism, it is ossible to conclude that mainstream economics, through appealing to models and concepts explicitly acknowledged to be fictitious, itself denies reality and life, and is thus nihilistic. However, desite suggestions, Shackle is ultimately unable to overcome the nihilistic tenencies of mainstream economic theories. Shackle identifies the individual subject as the source of knowledge, yet identifies the subject as analogous to an object, hence replicating the cause of nihilism.     

新时代中国国际政治经济学研究:问题与方向

国际形势的迅速变化为国际政治经济学研究提供了更为广阔的研究视野,但面对复杂多变的世界经济和政治形势,单纯的经济学研究往往无法解释现实,经济学、政治学以及社会学等诸多学科间的分立与隔绝状态不利于国际政治经济学的深入发展。中国的国际政治经济学研究需要关注五个方面的问题:第一,打破经济学尤其是国际经济学研究的专业壁垒;第二,加强对经济全球化问题的综合性研究;第三,注重对美国国内经济结构变化及其对社会生活、政治生活与对外政策影响的研究;第四,加强对国际货币、资本、金融运行机制的深入研究并从货币权力视角构建国际政治经济学框架;第五,加强对1500年以来大国兴衰过程中"挑战国陷阱"问题的研究。只有在解决好上述五个问题的基础上,国内理论界才能构建一个符合新时代要求的国际政治经济学理论和大国关系理论,并以此支撑中国的可持续崛起。     

Economics and underdetermination: a case study of urban land and housing economics

Underdetermination, associated with the Duhem–Quine thesis,is a familiar if under-researched theme in economics. In thelight of this, we examine the development of urban land andhousing economics. Through its Cartesian dualistic delineationof theory and data, the contemporary mainstream approach appearsunable to circumvent the problem of underdetermination. In effect,it employs the strong version of Duhem–Quine in its retentionof the assumption of a single, unitary competitive market (andassociated access–space trade-off). Conversely, we highlightthe affinity of Ely's (and the later Columbia School's) approachto pragmatists Dewey and Peirce, which provides a more fruitfulbasis for explanation.     

马克思经济学发现经济危机的社会哲学观和研究方法论——兼论马克思经济学和现代主流经济学的认知差异

马克思经济学比现代主流经济学更容易发现经济危机,主要源于两个基本特征:一是在社会哲学观上坚持矛盾冲突论,从而发现个人理性与集体理性之间的不一致性;二是在研究方法论上采用平均主义分析,从而更适合使用统计材料和历史材料来考察宏观经济的周期性波动。正因如此,马克思经济学能够充分认识到自由市场经济内含的冲突性,并从收入分配角度揭示了经济危机的内在根源;相应地,解决经济危机的根本措施就是,改变不合理的收入分配制度。     

基于自然资本的经济增长可持续条件研究

主流经济增长理论对经济增长可持续条件的研究普遍忽视了自然资源的贡献。随着自然资本的耗竭 ,经济增长的决定因素将由人造资本转向自然资本。技术进步必须从节约人造资本转向节约自然资本 ,只有技术进步能够充分提高自然资本的生产率 ,经济增长才会持续下去。当技术进步提高自然资本生产率的机会已经耗尽时 ,经济增长将停止 ,进入稳态。     

The impacts of women's land ownership: Evidence from Vietnam

Women's equal access to and control over economic resources such as land are integral to achieve gender equality and sustainable economic development. This study evaluates the impacts of women's land ownership on various women's and household's outcomes in the context of Vietnam. We discuss the beneficial effects of allowing women to own more land on both women and their families. In particular, there is a positive association between women's land ownership and intra-household bargaining power in various aspects. In particular, the relationship is the strongest for women's autonomy in decisions regarding their children. It is also easier for land-holding women to formally access credit and invest in human capital. We further study the favorable effects of women's land ownership on their families in terms of spending and saving behaviors. Finally, women's land ownership also contributes to household social capital. These findings lend support to the passage and implementation of laws intended to grant women equal rights to the ownership and control over land.     

Foreign Direct Investment,Female Education,Capital Formation,and Economic Growth in Japan and South Korea

ABSTRACT

The influence of foreign direct investment (FDI) on host country‘s economic growth is a widely explored issues in the existing economic literature. This study attempts to examine the role of foreign direct investment, capital formation, and expansion of female education on economic growth of Japan during the period 1971–2014, using time series observations. The study further makes a comparison regarding the association with FDI and economic growth with South Korea, another major OECD economy of Asia The study utilises the auto-regressive distributed lag (ARDL) bounds approach to cointegration to examine the long run causality association among the variables. Today, for sustainable economic development the social and institutional policy issues are important. The paper explores one such social issue, namely gender and economic prosperity. This paper has novel contributions in the current research on time series, econometric analysis for the following reasons: (1) it has investigated the relationship between economic growth, foreign direct investment and capital formation in a gendered differential framework (utilising the role of human capital formation among men versus women; (2) the study covers a long period and more recent time period (till 2014), which concurs with the upsurge of world FDI movements and (3) the study also explores the major structural breaks of the two economies and how economic growth is impacted thereof.