Search results

This paper illustrates the fundamental issues of “disequilibrium” unemployment theory by means of a relatively simple model. Both the static and dynamic approaches to this subject are combined within a consistent analytical framework. Although a formal model is outlined the emphasis is on intuitive argument rather than technical detail.

Discusses the heritage of John Maynard Keynes in terms of application and results of his new economic philosophy over the last four decades. Compares the Keynesian school of thought with other classical and contemporary economists in relation to foundations of monetary and economic analysis, the economics of stable equilibrium, and the economics of disequilibrium. Comments on Keynes’ concept of economic stability, his view on the instability of money and monetary reform, his concept of monetary policy and of the pure theory of money, and his misjudgement of the mixed nature of the modern gold standard. Examines the provisions of the US Federal Reserve Act (1913), focusing on the Federal reserve systems’ nature and functioning, cited by Keynes as a prototype of a modern gold standard. Concludes with an examination of the international aspect of the modern gold standard.

In this paper, the main focus is on supply and demand auction systems with resource pooling in modern supply chain from a theoretical modeling perspective. The supply and demand auction systems in modern supply chains among manufacturers and suppliers serve as information sharing mechanisms. The purpose of this paper is to match the supply and demand such that a modern supply chain can achieve incentive compatibility and economic efficiency. The authors design such a supply and demand auction system that can integrate resources to efficiently match the supply and demand.

The authors propose three theoretic models of modern supply chain auctions with resource pooling according to the Vickrey auction principle. They are supply auction model with demand resource pooling, demand auction model with supply resource pooling, and double auction model with demand and supply resource pooling. For the proposed auction models, the authors present three corresponding algorithms to allocate resources in the auction process by linear programming, and study the incentive compatibility and define the Walrasian equilibriums for the proposed auction models. The authors show that the solutions of the proposed algorithms are Walrasian equilibriums.

By introducing the auction mechanism, the authors aim to realize the following three functions. First is price mining: auction is an open mechanism with multiple participants. Everyone has his own utility and purchasing ability. So, the final price reflects the market value of the auction. Second is dynamic modern supply chain construction: through auction, firm can find appropriate partner efficiently. Third is resources integration: in business practices, especially in modern supply chain auctions, auctioneers can integrate resources and ally buyers or sellers to gain more efficiency in auctions.

In the paper, the authors propose three theoretic models and corresponding algorithms of modern supply chain auctions with resource pooling according using the Vickrey auction principle, which achieves three functions: price mining, dynamic modern supply chain construction and resources integrating. Besides, these proposed models are much closer to practical settings and may have potential applications in modern supply chain management.

This paper draws upon the work of Georgescu‐Roegen to outline some theoretical alternatives to standard welfare theory, and to examine the policy implications of discarding the Walrasian core of neoclassical economics.

Current work in behavioral economics and game theory shows that economic behavior depends on social context, a point understood by social economists for a hundred years or more. This work is related to Georgescu's contributions to utility theory and bioeconomics.

Neoclassical welfare economics continues to dominate economic theory and policy even though its theoretical foundations, economic man and perfect competition, have been discredited by mainstream theorists. Economic processes take place in specific social contexts and also coevolve with the biophysical universe.

Although modern economics is incorporating many of Georgescu's insights about human preferences it has yet to come to grips with the fact that human economic activity is shaped by its biophysical context. It is believed this should be a major focus of future economic research.

Provides further insights into welfare theory and bioeconomics.

Peter Boettke and I had taken Don Lavoie's graduate Comparative Economic Systems course during the Fall of 1985. Lavoie had just published Rivalry and Central Planning (Lavoie, 1985b) and National Economic Planning: What is left? (Lavoie, 1985a), and was at the cusp of establishing himself as a major player in the comparative systems and contemporary critique of socialist planning literature.¹

Profiles Gunnar Myrdal, who was born in Sweden, but after his graduation from Stockholm University’s Law School, studied in Germany and England, before moving to the USA, where he was commissioned to make an in‐depth study of the ‘sAmerican Negro problem’s (1944). Equality was a recurring theme in his work, and as all great scientists, he told the truth, as he believed he saw it.

States that the homo economicus abstraction remains dominant in economics, despite a range of criticisms of its use over the years. Many institutionalists, post‐Keynesians, neo‐Austrians and social economists have insisted that economic analysis must be conducted in an explicit historical context, where the difficulties which economic decision‐makers face, because of time irreversibility, structural change and fundamental uncertainty, are taken into account, as well as non‐economic influences on economic behaviour. Understandably, there has been a reluctance to construct a competing abstraction with formal properties which are comparable to those of the homo economicus construct. It is argued in this paper that the development of an alternative behavioural abstraction constitutes an important goal, both in terms of clarifying the limitations of homo economicus and providing an analytical basis upon which investigations of economic behaviour in historical time can be built.

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.

Describes how mathematics enjoyed a virtual monopoly as the privileged method of economic inquiry in the post‐war period. Counters the argument that such a position generates negative consequences, such as monopoly rents and the abuse of dominant positions. Argues that competing schools of economic thought such as Chicago, Harvard, neoclassical and post‐Keynesian, neo‐Australian, evolutionary and institutional economists all hold positions that diverge on essentials. Suggests that the market structure of post‐war economies is not a monopoly but a heterogeneous asymmetric oligopoly with a few large and a fringe of small suppliers. Analyses the relationship between two large and two fringe suppliers, stating that the oligopoly metaphor suggests that there is competition between schools that may lead to winners and losers and to changes in the market shares. In conclusion, offers a projection of what the author expects, i.e. who will lose and how the market structure will change, offering an insight into the role of mathematics.

The logic of economic inquiry requires two distinct research programs. One program treats economic life in terms of invariant formal categories across time and place. The other program treats the continual generation of novelty and turbulence through time and human interaction. These programs are not commensurable: one cannot be reduced to the other. The former program must be conveyed by a theory of equilibrium; the latter program requires a process-based theory of emergent phenomena. Roy Weintraub articulated a neo-Walrasian research program in his General Equilibrium Analysis, and here I sketch a complementary neo-Mengerian program. In presenting this sketch, I also explain that needless analytical confusion and antagonism can result from a failure to recognize that economic analysis requires two distinct research programs. As a historical side-bar, Carl Menger probably recognized this situation, as evidenced by his correspondence with Léon Walras.