SHOE Archives

Societies for the History of Economics

SHOE@YORKU.CA

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
[log in to unmask] (Drue Barker)
Date:
Fri Mar 31 17:18:34 2006
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (43 lines)
================== HES POSTING ==================== 
 
I have been following the discussion of the institutionalization of 
neoclassical economics with much interest, and find that I must disagree 
with Robin Neill's claim that,  
 
>The economic system of the United States approximates the Neoclassical 
>paradigm.  Its structure, its aspirations and values, its problems are 
>easily analyzed in the context of that paradigm....That 
>is why the Neoclassical paradigm is dominant in the United States. 
 
First regarding structure, I would argue that the structures assumed by 
neoclassical economics (many firms, freedom of entry and exit, perfect 
information, and so forth) bear little resemblance to the actural structure 
of the contemporary U.S. economy, dominated by large national and 
multinational corportions, high entry barriers and asymmetric information. 
As Joan Robinson famously said, the setting of supply and demand analysis 
has no resemblence to modern capitalism.  It is suited, rather, to the 
disucsssion of a rural fair where peasants and artisans meet to exchange 
products. It is more characteristic of a rural fair where peasants and 
artisans barter their surplus products.  
 
However, I do think that Robin is correct in saying that the aspirations 
and values of the U.S. economy are easily analyzed in the context of the 
neoclasscial paradigm.  Again to call on Joan Robinson, "the central 
doctrine of orthodox economics is the defense of the freedom of anyone 
who has money to spend, to spend it as he likes." 
 
(From "The Disintegration of Economics," in What are the Questions? What 
are the Answers, 1980, M.E. Sharp.) 
 
For me the interesting issue is why the neoclassical paradigm is able to 
fail so miserably by any criteria for good social science, but 
nevertheless retain such a strong hold on so many people and institutions.  
Including those who's interests are not well served by modern corporate 
capitalism. 
 
 Drue Barker 
 
============ FOOTER TO HES POSTING ============ 
For information, send the message "info HES" to [log in to unmask] 
 

ATOM RSS1 RSS2