Capitalism: Competition, Conflict, Crises, Professor Anwar Shaikh, SOAS University of London

Подписаться 55 тыс.

Просмотров 23 тыс.

50% 1

www.soas.ac.uk/development/
This event titled "Capitalism: Competition, Conflict, Crises" was presented by Anwar Shaikh and was held as part of the Development Studies Seminar Series at SOAS University of London on 11 October 2016.
You can find out more about this event at goo.gl/DDLa7v
This lecture attempts to show that one can explain these and many other observed patterns as results of intrinsic forces that shape and channel outcomes. Social and institutional factors play an important role, but at the same time, the factors are themselves limited by the dominant forces arising from "gain-seeking"; behaviour, of which the profit motive is the most important. These dominant elements create an invisible force field that shapes and channels capitalist outcomes. The approach of this book is very different from that of both orthodox economics and the dominant elements in the heterodox tradition.
There is no reference whatsoever to an idealised framework rooted in perfect firms, perfect individuals, perfect knowledge, perfectly selfish behaviour, rational expectations, and so-called optimal outcomes. Nor is there any need to explain particular observed patterns as departures from this Edenic state arising from “imperfections” of various sorts. The talk develops microeconomic and macroeconomic theory from real behaviour and real competition, and uses it to explain empirical patterns in microeconomic demand and supply, wages and profits, technological change, relative prices of goods and services, interest rates, bond and equity prices, exchange rates, patterns of international trade, growth, unemployment, inflation, national and personal inequality, and the recurrence of general crises, such as the current one which began in 2007-2008.

Опубликовано:

19 окт 2016

Ссылка:

Скачать:

Готовим ссылку...

Добавить в:

Мой плейлист

Посмотреть позже

Комментарии : 5

@atwarwithdust 7 лет назад

Summarizing Shaikh's answer as to whether we've entered the stage of monopoly capitalism: Contrary to the standard Marxist and Keynesian explanations, "there is no evidence for systematic monopoly power at all." Then why did those schools come to believe it? Because they irrationally opposed orthodox economic textbooks which begin from real competition. That presumes that Friedman's model of competition is the only valid one and that Marx shares that model! Empirically, however, scale has no impact on the profitability of firms (only on their volatility). And capitalism is not a settled oligarchy, but an on-going antagonism - a war between mafias, not a Fukuyama-choreographed ballet.

@webmthread2253 7 лет назад

Orthodox economic textbooks begin from perfect competition and those schools rationally use this conception.

@RushuFriends 7 лет назад

Actually scale has an impact on profitability. It reduces the profit rate since output is mostly linked to labor and with a higher capital to labor ratio, the surplus to capital ratio and hence the profit rate is reduced. The firm might have a higher profit margin (p-c/p) because scale reduces cost, it will however reduce the profit rate since capital is increased.

@hugesinker 6 лет назад

There is a common phrase that is used throughout modern economic textbooks when they talk about contemporary theory-- Ceteris Paribus. This means 'all else being equal'. This guy doesn't seem to understand that, so he instead assumes that the contemporary view is not just incomplete, but entirely wrong because it supposedly assumes that human beings are only concerned with things and that outside dynamics and social factors play no role. Actually, it is widely acknowledged by everyone that they do play a role, and often a significant one-- it's just that the theory is to be applied when these things are controlled for, to the extent they are controlled for, or that they are more applicable when other factors have a relatively minor role. This is useful, especially in accounting for averages. In fact, controlling for various factors is what makes scientific analysis of anything possible.