Search results

Discussion of scientific progress in science philosophy texts suggests that aggressiveness and selfishness on the part of scientists is associated with high productivity. It is argued that the behaviour that appears to be the most improper actually facilitates the manifest goals of science. This article shows that the making of the 1930s generation of a sample of eminent economists was shaped by a high sense of co‐operation; continuing collaborative contact in the form of dual authorships of books and articles, joint teaching assignments, and review and support of each other′s writings, but very little of the intensive, relentless competition one finds among natural scientists. The difference stems not so much from the fact that economics is a soft science, but rather from the degree of maturity of the discipline. The 1930s generation of economists was fortunate to enter the field at a time when it was ready for its take off.

This chapter explores a number of relatively unknown aspects of the controversy over Milton Friedman’s March 1975 visit to Chile through the analytical framework provided by James M. Buchanan’s late 1950s assessment of the economist-physician analogy. The chapter draws upon a range of archival and neglected primary sources to show that the topics which generally rear their head in any contemporary discussion of Friedman’s visit to Chile – for example, whether it is appropriate to provide policy advice to a dictator – were aired in a largely private mid-1970s exchange between Friedman and a number of professional associates. In particular, the controversy over Friedman and Chile began several months before Friedman arrived in Santiago.

As Bruce Caldwell (2007, p. 1) notes, Hayek's classic text had a “decidedly inauspicious” beginning. In spring 1933, Hayek wrote a memorandum (Nazi socialism) to Sir William Beveridge – then Director of the London School of Economics – arguing that National Socialism represented the “culmination” (Hayek, [1933] 2007, p. 245) of earlier pro-socialist trends. As Hayek puts it, National Socialism was[The] ultimate and necessary outcome of a process of development in which the other nations have been for a long time steadily following Germany…The gradual extension of the field of state activity, the increase in restrictions on international movements of both men and goods, sympathy with central economic planning and the widespread playing with dictatorship ideas, all tend in this direction. (Hayek, [1933] 2007, p. 248, italics added)

Holbrook Working (1949) discovered that the percentage change in futures prices seemed to be largelyrandom. This led Paul Samuelson (1965) to develop the Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH) which claims that the current spot and futures1 prices fully reflect all relevant information. Furthermore, because the future flow of information cannot be anticipated, price changes will not be serially correlated. These papers linked the notion of randomness of price changes to informational efficiency. From that point on, a major part of the empirical studies of asset markets has been the application of time series analysis to asset prices, in order to evaluate whether the price changes are random and whether futures prices reflect all available information. As the statistical tests became more sophisticated, the number of empirical studies increased and the results became more contradictory and difficult to interpret. An economic theorist can only be bemused by contemplating the empirical/econometric studies in the finance literature.

The economic doctrine of market efficiency plays an essential role in securities fraud litigation. In lawsuits alleging violations of SEC Rule 10b-5, the plaintiffs typically must argue that the market for the relevant security is efficient, and therefore that the “fraud on the market” doctrine applies. However, the term “market efficiency” is often applied imprecisely. In this chapter, we discuss properties of efficient markets that have been proposed in academic research, legal scholarship, and case law. We explore what must be assumed about capital markets for each of these properties to hold. We then ask how, in practice, each property could be rebutted.

Seeks to demonstrate that the Talmudic scholars possessed theoretical knowledge and practical experience regarding the market phenomenon of business disturbances, recognizing the existence of a causal relationship between the physical determinants of the cycles of the weather patterns and the fortunes of the agricultural sector, a condition which affected the economy as a whole. Discusses this linkage with respect to the insights in Johanan′s works. These come close to Hawtrey′s view of the business cycle as a monetary phenomenon, on the one hand, and Samuelson′s discussion of “supply shock” as a result of “...droughts and crop failures in agriculture”, on the other. Johanan also recognized the existence of a quantitativerelationship between money and prices, and prices and incomes. This suggests that the Talmudic scholars had come to appreciate the fundamentals of what was later to emerge as the quantity theory of money.

Looks at the impact John Maynard Keynes and the movement (Keynesian) he started had on the theory and practice of economics in the 1930s and onwards. Identifies respective problems about capitalism and discusses them in depth. States that the monetary and fiscal policies recommended by Keynes have helped the West escape severe social consequences in the aftermath of the Great Depression. Goes on to show how economists after Keynes carried his work forward and upward in the 1940s and 1950s. Closes by stating there is a further, third revolution in economic thinking on the rise.