Where is the US economy headed?

@ican711nm,

Here, ican is promoting the fallacy that the fascistic right would not be corrupted by the power they already have and the additional power they seek. This is worded so as to say that only the left is corruptible.

2 Replies

@plainoldme,

That's because of his myopic brain; it doesn't register anything when conservatives in public service commit crimes.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

How much do you think ican's brain actually registers?

0 Replies

For George and Hawk.

Quote:

A neoinstitutional theory of social change in
Veblen's "The Theory of the Leisure Class"

Marc R. Tool
Professor Emeritus of Economics
California State University, Sacramento
Prepared for inclusion in Warren J. Samuels, ed., The Leisure Class and Sovereignty: The Centenary of The Founding of Institutional Economics, New York: Routledge.

Presented at Meetings of the European Association for Evolutionary Political Economy, Krakow, Poland, October 1995, and at meetings of the International Thorstein Veblen Association at Carleton College in Northfield MN May 1996.

The author wishes to thank Paul D. Bush for most helpful comments on earlier drafts.

A neoinstitutional theory of social change in
Veblen's The Theory of the Leisure Class

What pertinence does Thorstein Veblen's widely read but insufficiently understood volume, The Theory of the Leisure Class (1934), have for those guiding social and economic change in contemporary economies? What does it offer beyond provocative captions and social satire? It is the purpose of this essay to demonstrate something of the continuing relevance of Veblen's contribution by identifying and exploring various aspects of his theory of social change, first introduced in his The Theory of the Leisure Class.

As Veblen's first book, The Theory of the Leisure Class contains in embryonic form major constructs and analyses more fully developed in his later works. With the addition of his early methodological essays in his The Place of Science in Modern Civilization (1961), an initial exposure to the theoretical core of much of his subsequent writing is provided.

Veblen was the unknowing founder of American institutional economics. He "caused a whole generation of economists to search their souls lest the truth be not in them" (Foster, 1949). His philosophical and theoretical contributions continue to under gird and inform contemporary neoinstitutional analysis and policy (Bush 1994, 291-96).

This essay characterizes his theory of social change in the following five components: Part I presents Veblen's general theory of social change as a process of overcoming institutional rigidities and transforming institutional structure. Part II examines Veblen's broad analytical approach to inquiry. Part 111 considers sources of social change with special reference to human agency. Part IV explores the character of change with particular attention to the Veblenian dichotomy. Part V identifies impediments to social change generated by invidious distinctions.

For the rest of the article which is too long for ci's and POM's attention spans see here-

http://www.elegant-technology.com/TVAtool.html

0 Replies

@plainoldme,

Your understanding of the world about you appears to be deficient.

If you "see no evidence of innovation in American business" , then I wonder just what you conceive constitutes innovation and where it might be found. Do you believe the proliferation of IT technology constitutes innovation? Though production is nearly worldwide now, the industry started here and most of the new products still are developed here. The list of American economic innovation is very long and it includes elements ranging from the mass production of automobiles and many other products; to the development of nuclear power, the aforementioned IT revolution, as well as most modern business management practices.

What exactly do you mean by,

Quote:

80% of American incomes froze after 1979.

. This appears to be a nonsensical factoid you have created out of thin air. Can you support it ? 1979 was over 30 years ago. Much has changed since then: many 1979 jobs no longer exist and many new ones have been created. However U.S. GDP & GDP per capita have, in real terms (constant $), increased significantly since then.

The heavy manufacturing and textile production industries in this country were indeed closed by the decisions of their managing executives, as you say. However, the fact is that they did so because they could no longer compete with far cheaper foreign labor. Moreover the stubborn insistence of labor unions on static work rules, job descriptions and labor rates provided very strong inhibitions on management's use of capital and increased automation to raise labor productivity and thereby preserve at least some of those jobs. The list of UAW strikes against Ford & GM in protest against job-preserving automation is very long indeed. Same goes for other elements of heavy industry and textile production.

This country remains the most desirable destination of immigrants from all parts of the world. They come here because they see a unique chance to better their lives in doing so. Are they all wrong?

2 Replies

@plainoldme,

plainoldme wrote:

Here, ican is promoting the fallacy that the fascistic right would not be corrupted by the power they already have and the additional power they seek. This is worded so as to say that only the left is corruptible.

You are promoting the fallacy that there is such a thing as the "fascist right." There is only the fascist left.

Dictatorship of any kind is leftist. On the absolute left there is absolute dictatorship. On the absolute right there is absolute anarchy. To the immediate right of Conservatives there are only Liberatarians. To the immediate right of Libertarians there are only anarchists.

To the left of Conservatives there are people who favor greater government control over individual choice. To the right of Conservatives there are people who favor less government control of individual choice. Conservatives favor the individual choices the Constitution of the USA secures.

AGAIN
If allowed to persist, leftists advocating socialism inevitably become corrupted by their power and establish dictatorships: for example, Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin, Mao Zedong, Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot, et cetera ... Castro, Chavez ...

Obviously, the left is not based on citizen control of the state and decision-making. Instead the left if permitted power too long, becomes based on its own evolution of dictatorship. To gain greater control of the citizens it seeks to rule, it propagandizes the claim that it is for increasing citizen control of the state and its decision making , but actually it operates to reduce, not increase, citizen control of the state and its decision making.

2 Replies

@ican711nm,

Quote:

To the immediate right of Libertarians there are only anarchists.

So you are arguing that the far right is against capitalism? That is an interesting argument ican, don't you think?

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

I have great admiration for inventors and innovators but not for monopolists who sit in the controls and extract all the money such as wWall Street Investment banks that thru the monopolistic policy of their dog the Fed has an exclusive hold on leverage loans that far exceed any businessman can imagine. The early goldsmith turned bankers with other people's money racked up 1,500% on loans not including interest based on a 15:1 leverage ratio. Basically it is ratio x 100. Of course, this is the theoretical gain.

1 Reply

@parados,

Quote:

So you are arguing that the far right is against capitalism? That is an interesting argument ican, don't you think?

I think Marx made a similar argument. That class conflict was not about capitalism but about who ran it--workers or bosses. If the workers ran industry for the workers of that industry then industry would come to resemble football. Whoever does run it would use the same methods. The division of labour mechanised. The football coach runs a near perfect meritocracy. A top coach runs as perfect a one as he can get. Within the rules imposed on him by football theologians who necessarily need authority to impose the rules.

The theologians are a far more nepotistic bunch and thus run nowhere near a meritocracy. Unless they are unmarried celibates of course scrutinising the "bigger picture".

The coach will play a player who does the business whether he comes from the slums and can't read or write or has a first from Harvard. The anarchist, after he has got over his astonishment that a bunch of blokes want to run around a field for an hour or two chasing a ball, would chuck the ball to them a leave them at it. He would never dream of traffic regulations.

The real right is anarchist. Evolution is nothing but anarchy. The internet is too anarchic for some governments.

I've seen Denis Hopper play a character who called the redneck cops "******* communists".

Leftists only favour the nepotism free meritocracy to get power. Once their kids start growing up watch the buggers go.

But the big laugh is that leftists supporting teaching the kids the principles of evolutionary anarchy are in the ouroborus position. And talking out of your arse is better than eating it. So I'll continue talking out of mine and you leftists can suit yourselves.

1 Reply

@spendius,

Corporations too are controlled by a few such as the CEO and the hand-picked Board Members and the Chairman. They are dictatorial and all kinds of scams such as executive pay, golden parachutes regardless of performance are examples of corporate malfeasance. Then there are the stock market shenanigans with short sells, rumors, fear mongering, etc. all controlled by brokerage firms. All these are performed by a select few. Of course, the unions have gone this way with union leadership run by a few.

0 Replies

@parados,

Parados, there you go again playing with the meaning of words. The far right consists of extreme anarchists. There is zero government. Therefore, there is zero government to secure indivisdual liberty. Conservatives want government that secures individual liberty. Participating in a capitalist economy is one of the liberties conservatives value. Extreme anarchist do too, but they are willing to trust the security of their capitalist economy to the chance that the existence of pervasive good will secure their liberty without government. Anarchists would rather take that chance than trust government to secure their liberty.

One thing all the right has in common is their fear and even hatred of dictatorship.

If allowed to persist, leftists advocating socialism inevitably become corrupted by their power and establish dictatorships: for example, Mussolini, Hitler, Stalin, Mao Zedong, Ho Chi Minh, Pol Pot, et cetera ... Castro, Chavez ...

Obviously, the left is not based on citizen control of the state and decision-making. Instead the left if permitted power too long, becomes based on its own evolution of dictatorship. To gain greater control of the citizens it seeks to rule, it propagandizes the claim that it is for increasing citizen control of the state and its decision making , but actually it operates to reduce, not increase, citizen control of the state and its decision making.

2 Replies

@ican711nm,

Quote:

Extreme anarchist do too, but they are willing to trust the security of their capitalist economy to the chance that the existence of pervasive good will secure their liberty without government. Anarchists would rather take that chance than trust government to secure their liberty.

You sure can write some humorous stuff ican...

Google anarchists against capitalism to see a ton of stories and video of anarchists marching against capitalism.

0 Replies

Good evening. Interesting discussion, I guess, over the past few pages.
When Congress gets back after the August recess they will have to consider what to do about the year-end expiration of the Bush tax cuts.
The Dems want to extend them for all but the top 3% or whatever. Many Repubs want the entire program to be extended, arguing that job creation comes from the top.
I suspect that both parties would just as soon punt on the issue until after November.
David Stockman was the head of Ronald Reagan's Office of Management and Budget. He was quite the poster boy for Reaganomics for awhile.
He had a NY Times op-ed piece that was more than a bit blistering against the Dems but particularly against the Repubs. I suspect Stockman, like us, is home tonight; he doesn't get invited to very many inside-the-beltway cocktail parties anymore.
He was interviewed on NPR this evening. You could google in "David Stockman Budget Reagan" for links to what he is arguing.

0 Replies

@ican711nm,

Quote:

There is only the fascist left.

What, dear readers, do you think this statement indicates?

1.) ican's IQ has slipped below 70.

2.) ican refuses to accept any personal responsibility for the destructive actions of the right.

3.) ican fails to realize that there can be no yin(g) without yan(g), no east without west and no left without right.

4.) ican has never read a legitimate work of history based on objective research.

5.) ican is in complete denial.

6.) ican is employed by the Republican Party.

7.) All of the above.

1 Reply

@talk72000,

georgeob showed that he did not read my post carefully.

1 Reply

@ican711nm,

Quote:

Parados, there you go again playing with the meaning of words

Parados isn't "playing with . . . meaning," but, rather, using words as they were meant to be used.

We have all told you that your definitions are wrong.

0 Replies

@plainoldme,

plainoldme wrote:

georgeob showed that he did not read my post carefully.

Nonsense. Your words were plain enough. A weak and evasive response .... unless of course you didn't understand what you wrote.

0 Replies

@plainoldme,

Quote:

There is only the fascist left.

Oh! I'm sorry! This was a description of the last item at ican's yard sale!

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

OK, I will do your work for you as you can't do it your self.

You quoted me:

Quote:

see no evidence of innovation in American business

Then you went on the blah blah blah as I knew you would about IT technology.

Well, I wrote there is no innovation in American business.

I said nothing about technology.

Technology does not need that superstructure we call business.

Thus, george can not read deeply enough.

Go to bed now, george, that is far and away too much thinking for you to do in one day.

And, I anticipate your hoity-toity response, so you won't have to give it.

2 Replies

@plainoldme,

plainoldme wrote:

OK, I will do your work for you as you can't do it your self.

You quoted me:

Quote:
see no evidence of innovation in American business

Then you went on the blah blah blah as I knew you would about IT technology.

Well, I wrote there is no innovation in American business.

I said nothing about technology.

Technology does not need that superstructure we call business.

Thus, george can not read deeply enough.

Go to bed now, george, that is far and away too much thinking for you to do in one day.

And, I anticipate your hoity-toity response, so you won't have to give it.

Oh, I see now. When you wrote "business" you really meant IT technology. That makes it all clear.

Please provide me a few concrete examples of significant IT technology innovations that occurred outside the domain of business enterprises. Then compare them to Microsoft, Apple, Google, Intel and all the rest. The IT types and venture capitalists running startup companies on the Penninsula south of San Francisco would find your attitude .... unreal.

You appear to believe that your rather pedestrian attempts at put downs are intimidating. In fact they merely amplify the impression of your insecurities. They are neither necessary or even helpful to your position.

2 Replies

Where is the US economy headed?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know