Keynes and mixed market capitalism

2021 ◽  
pp. 126-150
Author(s):  
Geoffrey Schneider
Author(s):  
Ivan V. Rozmainsky ◽  
Yulia I. Pashentseva

The paper is devoted to the economic analysis of rationality in the tradition of Harvey Leibenstein: the authors perceive rationality as “calculatedness” when making decisions, while the degree of this “calculatedness” is interpreted as a variable. Thus, this approach does not correspond to the generally accepted neoclassical interpretation of rationality, according to which rationality is both full and constant. The authors believe that such a neoclassical approach makes too stringent requirements for the abilities of people. In real life, people do not behave like calculating machines. The paper discusses various factors limiting the degree of rationality of individuals. One group of factors is associated with external information constraints such as the complexity and extensiveness of information, as well as the uncertainty of the future. Another group of factors is related to informal institutions. In particular, the paper states that the system of planned socialism contributes to less rationality than the system of market capitalism. Thus, in the post-socialist countries, including contemporary Russia, one should not expect a high degree of rationality of the behavior of economic entities. The paper mentions, in particular, the factors of rationality caused by informal institutions, such as the propensity to calculate, the propensity to be independent when making decisions and the propensity to set goals. The authors also believe that people who live on their own are usually more rational than people who share a common household with someone else. This assumption is verified econometrically based on data on young urban residents collected by the authors. It turned out that the behavior of people included in this database, in general, corresponds to what the authors believed.


This book critically reflects on the failure of the 2003 intervention to turn Iraq into a liberal democracy, underpinned by free-market capitalism, its citizens free to live in peace and prosperity. The book argues that mistakes made by the coalition and the Iraqi political elite set a sequence of events in motion that have had devastating consequences for Iraq, the Middle East and for the rest of the world. Today, as the nation faces perhaps its greatest challenge in the wake of the devastating advance of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) and another US-led coalition undertakes renewed military action in Iraq, understanding the complex and difficult legacies of the 2003 war could not be more urgent. Ignoring the legacies of the Iraq War and denying their connection to contemporary events could mean that vital lessons are ignored and the same mistakes made again.


2008 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
pp. 601-615 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ka Ho Mok

China and Vietnam have experienced drastic social, economic and political changes, especially when these two socialist regimes have started economic reforms in the last few decades. In order to create more opportunities for higher education with limited national resources, both Chinese and Vietnamese governments have adopted strategies along the lines of marketization and privatization to reform their higher education systems. The major objective of this article is to critically examine how the market transition taking place in China and Vietnam has led to changes in education governance, particularly examine how these two governments have approached the challenges of global capitalism by transforming the socialist education model into a more market-oriented one. This article also discusses the major challenges and policy implications when education is increasingly privatized and marketized in China and Vietnam.


Author(s):  
Edward D. Mansfield

This chapter surveys the empirical literature on the effects of foreign trade on political-military conflict. There have been three “waves” of work on this topic since 1980. It is argued that the most recent wave differs from earlier waves in various important respects. First, it has made significant headway in addressing the causal mechanisms underlying the relationship between trade and conflict. Second, this wave has addressed a wider variety of aspects of trade, including trade policy and trade agreements. Third, a variety of recent studies have shed new light on the effects of trade on the outbreak of war, as well as the effects of war on the trade ties of combatants. Finally, the third wave of research on trade and conflict has addressed whether the effects of trade stem from market capitalism more generally and whether a simultaneous relationship exists between trade and conflict.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document