Showing posts with label Michael Roberts. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Michael Roberts. Show all posts

Saturday, November 9, 2019

Capital in the 21st Century by Thomas Piketty — Book Review by Michael Roberts


A Marxian economist looks at Piketty.

Bella Caledonia
Capital in the 21st Century by Thomas Piketty
Book Review by Michael Roberts
Cross posted from Brave New Europe.

Wednesday, September 18, 2019

The trouble with capitalism — Chris Dillow

Are the faults of capitalism curable, or are they instead symptoms of a chronic disease? This is the question posed by Martin Wolf:
What we increasingly seem to have…is an unstable rentier capitalism, weakened competition, feeble productivity growth, high inequality and, not coincidentally, an increasingly degraded democracy.
There is much to admire in this piece. But I fear it understates the problem with capitalism....
Falling rate of profit?

Stumbling and Mumbling
The trouble with capitalism
Chris Dillow | Investors Chronicle

Thursday, August 29, 2019

Bill Mitchell — Spending equals income whether it comes from government or non-government

It is now clear that to most observers that the use of monetary policy to stimulate major changes in economic activity in either direction is fraught. Central bankers in many nations have been pulling all sorts of policy ‘rabbits’ out of the hat over the last decade or more and their targets have not moved as much or in many cases in the direction they had hoped. Not only has this shown up the lack of credibility of mainstream macroeconomics but it is now leading to a major shift in policy thinking, which will tear down the neoliberal shibboleths that the use of fiscal policy as a counter-stabilisation tool is undesirable and ineffective. In effect, there is a realignment going on between policy responsibility and democratic accountability, something that the neoliberal forces worked hard to breach by placing primary responsibility onto the decisions of unelected and unaccountable monetary policy committees. And this shift is bringing new players to the fore who are intent on denying that even fiscal policy can stave off major downturns in non-government spending. These sort of attacks from a mainstream are unsurprising given its credibility is in tatters. But they are also coming from the self-proclaimed Left, who seem opposed to a reliance on nation states, and in the British context, this debate is caught up in the Brexit matter, where the Europhile Left are pulling any argument they can write down quickly enough to try to prevent Britain leaving the EU, as it appears it now will (and that couldn’t come quickly enough).
Bill addresses the charge from the Left that MMT is not Marxian enough.
I would also say that my career in economics has been inspired by the basic insights about Capitalism provided by Karl Marx (and Friedrich Engels) and the writers that followed in that tradition.
But I would also be sure to disagree with Michael Roberts assertion that “MMTers deny the validity and relevance of Marx’s key contribution to understanding the capitalist system: that is it is a system of production for profit; and profits emerge from the exploitation of labour power – where value and surplus value arises” (Source).
As one of the developers of MMT, I have always made it explicit that Marx’s ideas on class and exploitation lie at the basis of Capitalist dynamics and should be the starting point for a progressive understanding.
So it is hard at times to know what being ‘Marxist’ means, which is especially the case when we consider the post-modern distractions that made ‘Marxism’ appear recondite, to say the least....
Longish and detailed, but one of Bill most significant posts on political economy. Necessary to understand nuances of MMT from a left perspective, and MMT is now being attacked from both right and left.

Bill Mitchell – billy blog
Spending equals income whether it comes from government or non-government
Bill Mitchell | Professor in Economics and Director of the Centre of Full Employment and Equity (CofFEE), at University of Newcastle, NSW, Australia

Monday, April 23, 2018

Marx Today

As the 200th anniversary of Marx’s birth gets closer, a host of conferences, articles and books on the legacy of Marx and his relevance today are emerging – including my own contribution. The most interesting was a speech last week by the governor of the Bank of England, Mark Carney in his homeland of Canada....
Michael Roberts Blog
Marx 200: Carney, Bowles and Varoufakis
Michael Roberts

See also

The Guardian — The Long Read
Yanis Varoufakis: Marx predicted our present crisis – and points the way out

also

Naked Keynesianism
On the blogs - Labor Theory of Value (LTV) Edition
Matias Vernengo | Associate Professor of Economics, Bucknell University

Tuesday, July 18, 2017

Nick Johnson — Production and realization of surplus value – Marxists, Keynesians and others

Many Marxists follow the man himself by emphasising that capitalism is a profit-driven system. By contrast, Keynesians, particularly the more radical post-Keynesians, see the system as demand-driven and therefore responsive to a policy of demand-expansion during a slowdown or recession.…

In sum then, I find the above quote from Marx on the contradiction between the production and realization of surplus value and profit very helpful. It offers tremendous insight into the dynamics of capitalism, which has given rise to periods of growth and crisis throughout its history. 
If Marx is right, different kinds of crisis may require different solutions: if the production of surplus value and profitability is insufficient, then some kind of restructuring is required; if its realization is weak due to inadequate demand, then policies which boost investment or consumption may be appropriate.
The Political Economy of Development

Tuesday, April 4, 2017

David F. Ruccio — Essays in persuasion

In my view, neither neoclassical nor Keynesian economics turns out to have the intellectual or political resources to effectively respond to the issues that motivate and resonate within contemporary populism. If anything, they have served to create the problems that have brought right-wing nationalist populism to the fore.
For good reason, both wings of mainstream economics have ceased to be persuasive.
Occasional Links & Commentary
Essays in persuasion
David F. Ruccio | Professor of Economics, University of Notre Dame

See also

“Dictator craze”

Tuesday, March 28, 2017

Chris Dillow — Keynes' flaws

Michael Roberts reminds us of something important – that Keynesian economics has severe shortcomings. I agree.
For me, the problem with Keynes was what he didn’t say. He was largely silent about three related issues: class, power and profits, or least he dismissed them lightly:
the problem of want and poverty and the economic struggle between classes and nations, is nothing but a frightful muddle, a transitory and an unnecessary muddle. (Preface to Essays in Persuasion)
It’s no accident that it should have been so easy to find a Keynesian-neoclassical synthesis, as both schools of thought ignored these matters.
This omission, however, has had several baleful effects....
Stumbling and Mumbling
Keynes' flaws
Chris Dillow | Investors Chronicle