Search results

This chapter offers a Marxist analysis of forms of value in capitalist economies, and their implications for accumulation, (in)stability, and economic policy. The study focuses on seven key categories: money, capital, credit, interest-bearing capital, fictitious capital, the domestic public debt, and macroeconomic management through monetary and fiscal policy. It argues, first, that there is an intrinsic tendency toward the growing complexity of value forms in capitalism. Its examination helps to locate the contradictions of accumulation at increasingly complex levels, and the emergence of specifically financial forms of instability. Second, state management of accumulation through fiscal and monetary policy and the domestic public debt are essential for the stabilization of the economy, but their effectiveness remains limited. Third, monetary and financial structures, their relationship with production, and capacity to stretch, transform, and (de)stabilize accumulation are historically and institutionally specific. Fourth, public policy can influence the level and composition of output and employment, and the distributional and other outcomes of accumulation. Examination of the capital relation from this angle can shed light upon the drivers and modalities of accumulation of real and financial assets, and the imperatives, forms, and limitations of state regulation of accumulation.

Homelessness has many causes and also is stigmatized in the United States, leading to much misunderstanding of its causes and what policy solutions may ameliorate the problem. The problem is of course getting worse and impacting many communities far removed from the West Coast cities the authors examine in this study. This analysis examines the socioeconomic variables influencing homelessness on the West Coast in recent years. The authors utilize a panel fixed effects model that explicitly includes measures of healthcare access and availability to account for the additional health risks faced by individuals who lack shelter. The authors estimate a spatial error model (SEM) in order to better understand the impacts that systemic shocks, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, have on a variety of factors that directly influence productivity and other measures of welfare such as income inequality, housing supply, healthcare investment, and homelessness.

This text analyzes the relationship between crises and the dominance of interest-bearing capital, with particular emphasis on fictitious capital, which forms a striking feature of contemporary capitalist economies. It discusses how capitalist crises are commonly viewed and how we should understand them, on several dimensions of reality, based on a comprehensive reading of Marx. We follow with a reflection on the nature and characteristics of interest-bearing capital and on fictitious capital and fictitious profit, given that the high activity of this last form of capital is a hallmark of current capitalism and is itself the maximum expression of the fetishism engendered by it. We conclude that what is understood as a crisis by people in general is, in fact, a source of enormous enrichment for the owners of fictitious capital.

This chapter introduces Marx's theory of the determination of profit rates. It contrasts this theory with what happened in the late nineteenth century to British profit rates with a detailed statistical account. It identifies missing features in the standard presentation and contrasts these with the overaccumulation hypothesis that he presents elsewhere. A formal mathematical model using the overaccumulation hypothesis is then given and tested against modern empirical data.

In Chapter 1, we critically reviewed the foundations of the free enterprise capital system (FECS), which has been successful primarily because of its wealth and asset accumulation potentiality and actuality. In this chapter, we critically argue that this capacity has been grounded upon the profit maximization (PM) theories, models, and paradigms of FECS. The intent of this chapter is not anti-PM. The PM models of FECS have worked and performed well for more than 200 years of the economic history of the United States and other developed countries, and this phenomenon is celebrated and featured as “market performativity.” However, market performativity has not truly benefitted the poor and the marginalized; on the contrary, market performativity has wittingly or unwittingly created gaping inequalities of wealth, income, opportunity, and prosperity. Critical thinking does not combat PM but challenges it with alternative models of profit sharing that promote social wealth, social welfare, social progress, and opportunity for all, which we explore here. Economic development without social progress breeds economic inequality and social injustice. Economic development alone is not enough; we should create a new paradigm in which economic development is the servant of social progress, not vice versa. Such a paradigm shift involves integrating the creativity and innovativity of market performativity and the goals and drives of social performativity together with PM, that is, from market performativity to social performativity.

This empirical chapter explores the case of Baltic Creative Community Interest Company (BC CIC), a creative hub that enabled and demonstrated intrapersonal entrepreneurial capitals (Pret et al., 2016) to adapt quickly and develop novel offers for their tenants during an unprecedented period of crisis and change in the wider ecosystem. BCCIC is a community-owned property development company established to regenerate an underused post-industrial area in Liverpool and support the Creative and Digital community. Over the past decade, they have become a creative hub where small, unique micro-businesses thrive alongside more established enterprises.

Using an organisational ethnographic approach, the authors highlight the complexity in the conversion of entrepreneurial capitals and how this has demonstrated resilience and adaptability in the CIC during the global coronavirus pandemic in the 2020s. During the first coronavirus lockdown in 2020, The CIC responded swiftly to tenants by providing a wide variety of business support initiatives. Regular communications on sector-specific COVID-19 operational guidance and a support programme to help tenants apply for Liverpool City Council Small Business Support grants.

The establishment of this hub for creative entrepreneurs prior to the recent disruption proved invaluable. Although they were severely tested, emerging behaviours, such as agility, adaptability, and resilience during periods of crisis, were identified. This chapter offers key insights for scholars and those leading on creative hubs and cluster policy development and economic initiatives for creative sector support regionally, nationally, and internationally.

This chapter provides an empirical assessment of the effects of infrastructure provision on structural change and aggregate productivity using industrylevel data for a set of developed and developing countries over 1995–2010. A distinctive feature of the empirical strategy followed is that it allows the measurement of the resource reallocation directly attributable to infrastructure provision. To achieve this, a two-level top-down decomposition of aggregate productivity that combines and extends several strands of the literature is proposed. The empirical application reveals significant production losses attributable to misallocation of inputs across firms, especially among African countries. Also, the results show that infrastructure provision has stimulated aggregate total factor productivity growth through both within and between industry productivity gains.