-
Aufschwung Central Banking counter-cyclicality Crisis divergence Dogmengeschichte Economic History EMU Europe euro zone Finanzkrise Finanzpolitik Forecasts Geldpolitik Germany Große Koalition Heterodoxy Humour Income Distribution Inflation Keynes Keynesianism Keynesianismus Konjunktur Krise Krisenmanagement Macroeconomics Methoden der empirischen Wirtschaftsforschung Microeconomics Monetarism Monetary Policy Music Neoclassical Economics policy-making political pressure Potenzialberechnung Productivity professorship Prognosen rationale Erwartungen Risk Self-image Self-Marketing Supply side economics Upswing
WP Cumulus Flash tag cloud by Roy Tanck requires Flash Player 9 or better.
Letzte Kommentare
- Benedita bei Germany: The shadow side of the rocky reform road
- Immobilienmakler in Hamburg bei Die Wachstumsprognose 2007 — ein “moving target”
- Aimée bei The case against stabilization policy — why is the discussion in the U.S. often so different from Europe?
- tabata bei Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine praevia lege poenali: A Reply to Ester Faia and Ignazio Angeloni
- Mała Księgowość bei Nullum crimen, nulla poena sine praevia lege poenali: A Reply to Ester Faia and Ignazio Angeloni
Archive
- Mai 2012
- Januar 2012
- Dezember 2011
- November 2011
- Oktober 2011
- September 2011
- Juni 2011
- Mai 2011
- April 2011
- März 2011
- Februar 2011
- Januar 2011
- Dezember 2010
- November 2010
- Juli 2010
- Juni 2010
- Mai 2010
- April 2010
- Februar 2010
- November 2009
- Oktober 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- Juli 2009
- Mai 2009
- April 2009
- November 2008
- Oktober 2008
- September 2008
- Juli 2008
- April 2008
- Februar 2008
- Dezember 2007
- November 2007
- Oktober 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- Juli 2007
- Juni 2007
- Mai 2007
- April 2007
- März 2007
Tag Archives: Heterodoxy
The Instability of Moderation – NYTimes.com
The Instability of Moderation – NYTimes.com.
Bezugnehmend auf den Artikel von Brad De Long, stellt Krugman weitergehende Fragen. Insbesondere hebt er hervor:
Intellectual Instability:
…
But economists were bound to push at the dividing line between micro and macro – which in practice has meant trying to make macro more like micro, basing more and more of it on optimization and market-clearing. And if the attempts to provide “microfoundations” fell short? Well, given human propensities, plus the law of diminishing disciples, it was probably inevitable that a substantial part of the economics profession would simply assume away the realities of the business cycle, because they didn’t fit the models.
The case against stabilization policy — why is the discussion in the U.S. often so different from Europe?
The case for (and against certain types of) stabilization policy is a highly disputed issue. This is at least the case in the U.S. but applies to a certain fraction of European economists — this blog is a nice example. If you need another example, just have a look a the new manifesto published by the "old" Keynesian (in the terminology of an JEP’s article by James Tobin on differences between "new" and "old" Keynesians, in terms of freshness of his ideas Solow seems to be as young as he ever was) Robert Solow and some European fellows, see the link here. Even under my qualifications however, it is justified to claim that the debate is much more alive in the U.S. — not among the mainstream of European economist.
Posted in Blog
Tagged counter-cyclicality, Finanzpolitik, Heterodoxy, Macroeconomics, Monetary Policy, policy-making
1 Comment
Heterodoxy-Debatte im Herdentrieb
Hier mein Kommentar noch einmal für alle Leser dieses Blogs:
Liebe DiskutantInnen, lieber Herr Lindner,
ich wundere mich ein wenig, wie spät die Diskussion in den Herdentrieb-Blog Einzug hielt aber besser spät als nie könnte man sagen.:)
Ich finde es sehr gut, dass in der Diskussion einige Mythen sowohl auf “Mainstream”- wie auch “Heterodoxie”-Seite in Frage gestellt werden. Anders formuliert: Grobe Überzeichnungen sind manchmal zulässig aber oftmals unangebracht. Weder ist der “Mainstream” allein nur auf “rationale Erwartungen” und “Gleichgewichtsfetischismus” ausgerichtet, noch hat die “Heterodoxie” (wie insbesondere bei Linkskeynesianern beliebt) eine alleinige Deutungshoheit.
Zwei Punkte zur Diskussion:
Dani Rodrik: Why Do Economists Disagree?
Dani Rodrik made a good point in making a distinction along the lines of an economist’s position towards the first fundamental welfare theorem.
Heterodoxy Debate — Side Effects (Blinder versus Mankiw or How to Be Apostate
The debate continues as the articles in New York Times and International Herald Tribune indicate.
A funny battle is delivered by Alan Blinder and Greg Mankiw. It sounds like Darth Vader versus Luke Skywalker — the interesting question is “who is who”. 
Hip Heterodoxy Debate Continues (Brad DeLong)
Brad DeLong reports about “‘Orthodox’ and ‘Heterodox’ Economics Once Again”. I think the distinction between orthodox, mainstream and heterodox is useful. Sometimes, I have the impression, heterodox economist fight a moving target by confusing the two aspect mentioned first.
Take an example: The so-called second strand of New Keynesian theory (as labelled in Mankiw’s and Romer’s two-volume book in the very early nineties is to some extent “mainstream” now (bounded rationality, financial fragility) — and conversations could be very productive for heterodox economists. The orthodox mainstream was by the way taken over by the first strand on New Keynesians — at least in monetary macro.
Thesen von Akerlof und Hans-Werner Sinn zusammen in einer Handelsblatt-Ausgabe
In der gestrigen Online-Handelsblattausgabe stehen im Header ein Artikel über die Thesen des Nobelpreisträgers George A. Akerlof und ein Interview mit Hans-Werner Sinn einträchtig nebeneinander. Das wäre nicht weiter berichtenswert, wenn nicht durch das Lesen des Artikels und des Interviews die volle Bandbreite der Herangehensweise der ökonomischen Beratungsprofession deutlich würde.
Während Akerlofs “Presidential Address” gerade in der AER veröffentlicht wurde und er darin einen Rückbezug der ökonomischen Theorie hin zu einer sozialwissenschaftlichen Fundierung fordert und damit die “social norms” in den Prozess der Beratung gerade (wieder) hineinholen will, gehen die Aussagen von Sinn m. E. in eine andere Richtung. Beispiel:
Hip Heterodoxy Debate Highlighted in Financial Times Deutschland
The hip heterodoxy debate continues and is highlighted in the FTD. You can find the first post here and the second one here.
Tracking the Hip Heterodoxy Debate
The debate continues. Here and here are interesting posts on Economist’s View.
Hip Heterodoxy Again: Tom Palley on Income Distribution
The discussion has still some interesting aspects.
Here is a quite thoughtful post by Tom Palley:
Last week as part of a discussion on the state of orthodox economics hosted by TPM Café, I posted an article excavating the microeconomic foundations of neo-classical economics. In that article I wrote:
There is one place that even orthodox lefties dare not go. That untouchable place is marginal product theory of income distribution, which basically says that competitive markets ensure that people are paid their contribution to production. This theory provides both a justification and an explanation of income distribution.
Posted in Blog
Tagged Heterodoxy, Income Distribution, Keynesianism, Neoclassical Economics
Leave a comment