RWER issue 58: Peter Radford
Ethics in economics – Where is it?
Peter Radford download pdf
Read and leave comments here
And register for the WEA online conference: Economics in Society: The Ethical Dimension
Leave a Reply
“a conceivably seminal contribution to this debate on economic systems and their place in human and natural systems.” – Steve Keen
“Some of his insights will no doubt become the key building blocks of the new economics the world needs so desperately today.” – Richard Koo
“This remarkable volume presents the full range of opinions on MMT, from its enthusiastic proponents to its severest critics” – John King
—– look inside —– $5.94 / $20.00
—– look inside —– $4.90 / $8.00
—– look inside —– $15.99
—– look inside —– $5.99 / 12.99
—– look inside —– $5.93 / $12.99
—– look inside —– $4.97 / $9.90
—— Ugarteche, Puyana and Madi ——
Gerson Lima / Maria Alejandra Madi
Edward Fullbrook and Jamie Morgan
————— Michael Hudson ————–
Maria Alejandra Madi / Jack Reardon
————- Edward Fullbrook ————-
—————— Steve Keen —————–
————— Richard Smith —————
————– Gustavo Marques————
– Victor Beker and Beniamino Moro –
————– Lars Pålsson Syll ————-
—————– Stuart Birks —————-
Edward Fullbrook and Jamie Morgan
———— Armando Ochangco ———-
Shimshon Bichler / Jonathan Nitzan
————— Mauro Gallegati ————–
————— Herman Daly —————-
————— Asad Zaman —————
—————– C. T. Kurien —————
————— Robert Locke —————-
Real-World Economics Review Blog 
Bravo Peter Radford!
Economics without ethics is an empty mental exercise. The ethics of economics are exceedingly simple. They can be reduced to this one maxim: Do not steal.
If you do not pay taxes on land and natural resources that are under your exclusive command, you steal from members of your community who will have to pay correspondingly higher taxes.
If you enjoy exclusive use of access to national credit, a common good, you steal from others in your community who will to pay you interest for their loans.
If you pay wages, you steal from your workers the fruits of capital appreciation.
If you agglomerate wealth into your hands using unethically acquired financial resources, you steal future capital appreciation from existing owners.
Yay!!! Bravo & kudos, Peter. Yet, let’s not forget the Golden Rule (not the plutocrat version): “Treat others as you would have them treat you.” – King Yshuah
Carmine, notions about taxation lacking comprehensive grounding in a big picture view of all the negative factors in a commercialized economy or plutonomy are inherently deficient. In a valid, viable, nonprofit money system managed by a government of, by, and for We the people, personal income tax and most other taxes are worse than unnecessary. It’s like robbing Peter to pay Paul, then robbing Paul to pay Peter, over and over and…
The current socioeconomic paradigm makes tax a way to get the 99% to pay double for everything while interest on debts drains the culture of its vitality and strength. Letting sociopathic privateers control the money system is exactly what Jefferson, among others, warned would enslave the world.
The cure is the whole truth + pure credit. See:
>> mm-greenbook.blogspot.com
Michael, it is good to see how much we agree. May I encourage you to contribute a Buddhist perspective on ethics in economics?
Dave, Friends & Allies, Season’s greetings & Christmas blessings to all. Now, Schumacher did an essay on Buddhist economics that probably covers the subject pretty well from the conventional standpoint. Yet, knowing what he never covered helped to inspire an exploration of the deepest, source level, causal principles & governing dynamics that led to my Fundamental Theory of Economics & Natural Values.
You can review the final final draft at EcotectureNOW.wordpress.com/unmoney along with some relevant posts from RWER blogs & comments that follow the theory.
I look forward to your feedback. If I continue getting no response, then I will have to assume that RW economists are as autistically egoic as the average plutonomist. After all, the only thing that could possibly prevent a co-creative response would be ethical shock & paralysis and/or neurotic/psychotic denial, right?