Comments on RWER issue no 84
Leave a Reply Cancel reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Real-World Economics Review
WEA Books

follow this blog on Twitter
Top Posts- last 48 hours
- Externality-downplaying economics
- Weekend read - The cause of stagflation
- Ecological reasoning demands perspectives that economics is designed to obliterate
- Reflections on the “Inside Job”
- Weekend read - Is human probability intuition actually ‘biased’?
- Economic forecasting — why it matters and why it is so often wrong
- Hyman Minsky and the IS-LM obfuscation
- An age of crisis
- Debt, deficits, secular stagnation and the which way is up problem in economics
- USA National Debt Graph by President – Roosevelt to Obama
Regular Contributors
Real World Economics Review
The RWER is a free open-access journal, but with access to the current issue restricted to its 25,952 subscribers (07/12/16). Subscriptions are free. Over one million full-text copies of RWER papers are downloaded per year.
WEA online conference: Trade Wars after Coronavirus
Comments on recent RWER issues
————– WEA Paperbacks ————– ———– available at low prices ———– ————- on most Amazons ————-
WEA Periodicals
----- World Economics Association ----- founded 2011 – today 13,800 members
Recent Comments
- Gerald Holtham on Economic forecasting — why it matters and why it is so often wrong
- Gerald Holtham on Ecological reasoning demands perspectives that economics is designed to obliterate
- Gerald Holtham on Weekend read – The cause of stagflation
- Gerald Holtham on Externality-downplaying economics
- Michael P Totten on Externality-downplaying economics
- Steven Klees on Externality-downplaying economics
- Ikonoclast on Ecological reasoning demands perspectives that economics is designed to obliterate
- Greg Daneke on Externality-downplaying economics
- Eric on Debt, deficits, secular stagnation and the which way is up problem in economics
- Charlie Thomas on Weekend read – The cause of stagflation
- rsm on Hyman Minsky and the IS-LM obfuscation
- yoshinorishiozawa on Hyman Minsky and the IS-LM obfuscation
- Gerald Holtham on Econometric testing
- Gerald Holtham on Hyman Minsky and the IS-LM obfuscation
- Gerald Holtham on Hyman Minsky and the IS-LM obfuscation
Comments on issue 74 - repaired
Comments on RWER issues
WEA Online Conferences
—- More WEA Paperbacks —-
———— Armando Ochangco ———-

Shimshon Bichler / Jonathan Nitzan

————— Herman Daly —————-

————— Asad Zaman —————

—————– C. T. Kurien —————

————— Robert Locke —————-

Guidelines for Comments
• This blog is renowned for its high level of comment discussion. These guidelines exist to further that reputation.
• Engage with the arguments of the post and of your fellow discussants.
• Try not to flood discussion threads with only your comments.
• Do not post slight variations of the same comment under multiple posts.
• Show your fellow discussants the same courtesy you would if you were sitting around a table with them.
Most downloaded RWER papers
- Global finance in crisis (Jacques Sapir)
- Why some countries are poor and some rich: a non-Eurocentric view (Deniz Kellecioglu)
- Debunking the theory of the firm—a chronology (Steve Keen and Russell Standish)
- The housing bubble and the financial crisis (Dean Baker)
- What Is Neoclassical Economics? (Christian Arnsperger and Yanis Varoufakis)
- Trade and inequality: The role of economists (Dean Baker)
- New thinking on poverty (Paul Shaffer)
- The state of China’s economy 2009 (James Angresano)
- Green capitalism: the god that failed (Richard Smith)
Family Links
Contact
follow this blog on Twitter
RWER Board of Editors
Nicola Acocella (Italy, University of Rome) Robert Costanza (USA, Portland State University) Wolfgang Drechsler ( Estonia, Tallinn University of Technology) Kevin Gallagher (USA, Boston University) Jo Marie Griesgraber (USA, New Rules for Global Finance Coalition) Bernard Guerrien (France, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne) Michael Hudson (USA, University of Missouri at Kansas City) Frederic S. Lee (USA, University of Missouri at Kansas City) Anne Mayhew (USA, University of Tennessee) Gustavo Marqués (Argentina, Universidad de Buenos Aires) Julie A. Nelson (USA, University of Massachusetts, Boston) Paul Ormerod (UK, Volterra Consulting) Richard Parker (USA, Harvard University) Ann Pettifor (UK, Policy Research in Macroeconomics) Alicia Puyana (Mexico, Latin American School of Social Sciences) Jacques Sapir (France, École des hautes études en sciences socials) Peter Söderbaum (Sweden, School of Sustainable Development of Society and Technology) Peter Radford (USA, The Radford Free Press) David Ruccio (USA, Notre Dame University) Immanuel Wallerstein (USA, Yale University)
Kudos to Janine R. Wedel for “Bureaucracy shouldn’t be a dirty word: the role of
people-responsive bureaucracy in a robust public economy.” An excellent contribution to a topic that needs much more attention from the left.
We know very well that opponents on the right have a great interest in making sure a “public economy” fails and so we have to do what we can to make sure that when we are able to pass legislation mandating a new service or public good that it is provided to people with a minimum of hassle, waiting, and maximum of joy.
That is not easy. The need for fairness and equality in access often end up being implemented with long and difficult procedural hurdles for the people being served. Private markets are less complicated in this regard… they are not fair or equal… if you have the money price you get the service or good, often with a smile; if you don’t have the money you get nothing. So the “public economy” is much more demanding in this regard. We have to get better at it… for everyone.
Galbraiths whole paper deserves a lot of contemplation and conversation . While I support the concept of the need for rules and laws I also believe for a law or rule to be effective it has to be supported by the populace. In my humble opinion this requires democratic conversation between the law makers and the populace , not laws made exclusively bye political and wealthy elites. Obviously this requires an education system that teaches the populace how to think not what to think so that they are able to understand the democratic process and take part in it. Ted
I appreciate the comments on the history of deregulation and the way this has been applied to the environment. The data clearly demonstrates that protecting the environment is good for the long term health of the economy, but most of the economists I run into lie about it. I think a discussion of the stupidity of “business climates” would add to the article.
I appreciate Michael Lind’s approach and the favourale view in theories like mercantilism, German historical school, Reinert or Ha -Joon Chang. The vision is equal chances for development to any political unit. What’s lacking in the article is a view on dwindling resources – how much of our species our old earth can bear?
As the grandson of Gerhard Colm, I appreciated Sekera’s explanation of Colm’s approach to understanding the public sector and its role in our economy. I wonder if she, or others, know about the 1960-61 meeting between Gerhard Colm and James M. Buchanan, the father of economic choice theory.
Regarding James K. Galbraith’s “The need for a new public administration,” I have tried to take economics one step closer to making government and other sectors more important in economic thinking. Most notably, I describe the idea that ideally, nonmarket sectors, among other things, set up the market for success and correct for market failure.
Beyond Profit and Self-interest: Economics with a Broader Scope. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar, 2003. Northampton, Massachusetts: Edward Elgar, 2004. Chapter 5.
“The Theory of Political and Social Economics: Beyond the Neoclassical Perspective,” Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics, Vol. 9, No.2, 1998, pp.93-124.
“Economics Outside the (Edgeworth) Box,” Post-Autistic Economics Review, issue no. 17, December 4, 2002, article 6. (http://www.btinternet.com/~pae_news/review/issue17.htm )