This paper argues that Marx’s economics leads us to a deeper understanding of our current crisis than do either mainstream, Keynesian or ‘mainstream Marxist’ economics. First, Marx explains how a tendency for the rate of profit to fall in boom manifests in the generation and speculative investment of ‘surplus’ capital in the financial system/fictitious capital, providing a tendential basis for, rather than an accidental account of, financial bubbles/crises. Secondly, Marx’s understanding that crisis is absolutely necessary to restore the profit rate, and so return the economy to boom, explains why developed countries’ governments’ attempts to postpone or limit crises since the 1970s have merely prevented a decisive enough crisis to restore the profit rate. Persistently low profitability has simply caused the world economy to stagnate, with persistently surplus capital taking many disruptive, adventurous paths. Finally, I consider how Marx’s identification of when lending is ‘lending’, and when it is simply ‘usury’, can help us understand how the nature of the financial system has changed over the last forty years.
Michael Heinrich's recent Monthly Review article claims that the law of the tendential fall in the rate of profit (LTFRP) was not proved by Marx and cannot be proved. Heinrich also argues that Marx had doubts about the law and that, for this and other other reasons, his theory of capitalist economic crisis was only provisional and more or less in continual flux.This response shows that Heinrich's elementary misunderstanding of the law--his belief that it is meant to predict what must inevitably happen rather than to explain what does happen--is the source of his charge that it is unproved. It then shows that a simple misreading of Marx's text lies at the basis of Heinrich's claim that the simplest version of the LTFRP, "the law as such," is a failure. Marx's argument that increases in the rate of surplus-value cannot "cancel" the fall in the rate of profit is then defended against Heinrich's attempt to refute it. Finally, the paper presents evidence that Marx was indeed convinced that the LTFRP is correct and that he regarded the crisis theory of volume 3 of Capital as finished in a theoretical sense.
Examines Eastern Europe’s struggle to privatise since the end of Communism; in particular reports on the experiences of Poland, Czechoslovakia and Russia. The danger of fast privatisation without restructuring is demonstrated by Czechoslovakia’s experience. Poland shows the importance of employing tight budget constraints. Russia demonstrates that privatisation in chaos is unlikely to produce real change.
If we accept the logic of mainstream free-market ideology-based macroeconomic theory, the European Central Bank should, to maximise economic efficiency, be independent of political influence. It is easy to forget that such an understanding of the economy was discredited by the great 1930s slump and banished from government policy in the``Golden Age '' of capitalism, between 1950 and 1973. Proposes to move beyond the free-market/monetarist/new-classical consensus to consider if the row over who should head the ECB is as trivial as it seems. First considers the work of Michal Kalecki, which typically represents the Golden Age's prevailing ideology of positive state intervention. Next considers how Europe's post-war economic performance can be consistently explained by Kalecki's work. Then moves on to consider the development of the Single European Currency project with the insight that an alternative economic ideology provides.
PurposeTo challenge the validity/usefulness of teaching mainstream neo‐classical/new‐classical economics, by contending that Marx provides a superior understanding of the essential nature of the capitalist system.Design/methodology/approachTo explain Marx the hermeneutic issue of which Marx must be addressed. Simultaneous and dualistic interpretations of Marx question Marx's key conclusions, suggesting that Marx's value theory is inconsistent. In contrast the Temporal Single System Interpretation (TSSI) of Marx contends that all of Marx's key conclusions/results hold if one adopts a sequential and non‐dualistic methodological approach, restoring Marx's central message/power.FindingsExplains how Marx endogenously accounts for the inevitable cyclical behaviour of capitalism, its tendency to concentrate and the development of the financial system. In short, Marx can explain the tendencies observed in the globalising world, whereas it is contended that mainstream analysis is hampered by prioritising an ideal simultaneous equilibrium and investigating how it might be exogenously disturbed.Research limitations/implicationsIf, as is contended, Marx's economics provides a superior understanding of the world, then research into Marx and analysis based on Marxian foundations should be prioritised.Practical implicationsMarx should be widely taught to improve students' understanding of the economy.Originality/valueQuite simply challenges orthodoxy by rediscovering value.
The aim of this article is to explore the current European debate over labour market flexibility. First, it considers lessons from economic theory. The classical consensus considering unemployment to be purely voluntary, the Keynesian consensus introducing the concept of demand deficient involuntary unemployment and finally the neoclassical consensus returning us to the classical viewpoint of the dominance of real conditions in the labour market. In order to proceed without confusion the article provides a clear working definition of the natural rate of unemployment and its three main components, voluntary unemployment, structural unemployment and involuntary unemployment. It then proceeds to analyse each of these main components in detail, illustrating the difference between a free market approach and a European Commission approach to reducing each component of unemployment.The article concludes that the future is dependent on all EU citizens as electors of governments and holders of wages to moderate.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.