改革理论大争论与科学改革观的创立

本文认为,对于改革理论大争论,不能做鸵鸟把头埋在沙子里,而必须面对和正视,以平和的心态看待改革理论大争论,以理性的态度揭示存在的深层次矛盾,深入探索科学改革观,促进改革全面、协调、渐进、稳定地进行。     

Debating the Socialist Calculation Debate: A Classroom Exercise

Abstract: The author describes a classroom exercise that introduces the Socialist Calculation Debate (SCD) to undergraduate economics students. The SCD concerns an issue that remains one of the most consequential of the 20th century— the belief in the superiority of socialism and central planning over capitalism and the free market. The exercise presents the SCD in an active learning atmosphere by requiring the students to read, interpret, and discuss the writings of three notable participants in the debate—Ludwig von Mises, Oskar Lange, and Friedrich Hayek. He discusses the format and objectives of the exercise, required and optional readings, and current relevance of the SCD.     

Private Property and Economic Calculation: A Reply to Andy Denis

Two years ago, in an article in this journal, Andy Denis revisited and added to the Socialist Calculation Debate, one of the 20th century’s greatest debates in economic theory. Denis argued that Austrian economists draw unsupported conclusions from their argument in claiming that private rather than several property is necessary for economic calculation. We note in this article that Denis’ argument rests on two key points: first, that the legal owners of capital, or the capitalists, play a purely passive role in the resource allocation process, and, second, that it is the managers who bear the entire burden of speculative decision making and economic calculation. We then proceed to criticize both points. Key to our argument is the fundamental insight of Austrian economics that the market is an open-ended process of discovery, coordination and value creation, where resource ownership and allocation is impossible to sever from entrepreneurship due to the inherent uncertainty of the future. We argue that, from the Austrian market process perspective, economic calculation indeed requires private property, and not simply several control, because entrepreneurship under competitive discovery must be subject to both the lure of profit and the risk of loss.     

抗战时期的国共关系与三民主义论战

抗日战争时期,国共两党以三民主义为政治基础,确立了第二次国共合作关系.但由于两党各自所倡导的三民主义是存在着本质上的区别,因此,国共双方发生了一场关于三民主义的激烈论战,共产党人就真假三民主义、三民主义与共产主义的关系等问题与国民党顽固派展开激烈的辩论.这次论战对国共两党未来的发展产生了重要的影响.     

最低工资制讨论中的几个热点问题

到2004年底,我国31个省(自治区、直辖市)全部建立了最低工资制度。目前,国家对最低工资标准与职工平均工资水平的比例关系没有统一的规定,国际上也不存在单独根据社会平均工资一定比例确定最低工资标准的所谓“社会平均工资法”,判断一个地区最低工资标准是否合理,要全面综合考虑。我国各地区工资标准差距客观存在,根本原因是我国经济发展不平衡。     

On single point forecasts for fat-tailed variables

We discuss common errors and fallacies when using naive “evidence based” empiricism and point forecasts for fat-tailed variables, as well as the insufficiency of using naive first-order scientific methods for tail risk management.We use the COVID-19 pandemic as the background for the discussion and as an example of a phenomenon characterized by a multiplicative nature, and what mitigating policies must result from the statistical properties and associated risks. In doing so, we also respond to the points raised by Ioannidis et al. (2020).     

Face-to-face communication: Is it really necessary in a digitizing world?

Many predictions regarding the extinction of face-to-face communication have themselves begun to disappear. While emerging information technologies are substantially altering the face of business communication, close-quarter discussion and debate remain important, as evidenced in the productivity of the medium and what we have recently learned about social behavior. Still, the possibility of dramatic change cannot be completely discounted. If technology ever manages to deliver what it has promised, there could be a significant shift toward digital communication. Although this will not likely occur over the next decade or two, beyond that, it should not be excluded from the realm of possibility.     

Cantor’s Diagonal Argument: An Extension to the Socialist Calculation Debate—A Comment

In a recent article Robert P. Murphy (2006) uses Cantor’s diagonal argument to prove that market socialism could not function, since it would be impossible for the Central Planning Board to complete a list containing all conceivable goods (or prices for them). In the present paper we argue that Murphy is not only wrong in claiming that the number of goods included in the list should be uncountable, but also that the number of equations/prices is irrelevant from the point of view of market socialism.