Post WW2 International
Economic Competitive Adjustment and the New Normal
1. Cold War to 1980 AD > AS
|2. Neo Liberal Reset 1980- 2008 AS > AD||3) Reactions to Neo Liberalism|
|Full Employment Goal = Inflation, Debtors Paradise||
Business Responded to
1) Sustained Deflation has
|2) Globalization Failed||
3) Pickett's R > G
and Back to Equilibrium
|Structural Causes||Structural Causes||Winners||Losers||Winners and Losers||
Historical Long Run?
Return on Capital Growth R > Growth rate of the Economy G. 90% of Income Gains Went to Top 1% and since 2012, most of this (70% of that 90%) went to Top 1/10 of 1%. Credit to consumers, business and governments expanded to equate AD with AS.
Restricted, Rigid Labor Markets
Central Government Strong
Central Bank Weak
Open Flexible Globalized Labor Markets
Government Less Economic Responsibility
Central Bank More Economic Responsibility
|Debtors: Can't or Wont Pay as Deflation Kills Wage Growth and Increases Real Debt Value||
Creditors lost as
Real Value Up
But Some Don't Pay
World's Very Poor and
Very, Very Rich Win
Vast Middle of Rich Western Nations are Stagnate
Wages Share All Time High
Corporate Profits All Time Low
Wages Share All Time Low
Corporate Profits All Time High
Populist Nationalist Parties
attracted voters with renationalization and anti-austerity policies
Center Left Parties in control
lost as lower wages and fighting more over less cartel politics blamed
capitalism and globalism
Center right parties in control blamed immigrants and globalism
Liberalism Under Siege 51 min vide
Neo Liberal Economics failed to forecast
I. Free Market
II. Real Economy of trade imbalances did not the root
cause the 2007-2008 FINANCIAL CRASH
III. Was Federal Reserve involvement in
a geopolitical world appropriate?
IV. Stability requires dollar supremacy
Summarized Below By Samir Gandesha, an Associate Professor in the Department of the Humanities
and the Director of the Institute for the Humanities at Simon Fraser University. posted on by
1. Growth of Populism
Right-wing populist parties throughout
Europe in Austria,
Hungary, and Poland
Latin America Bolivarian, Venezuela Bolivia and Argentina.
Focus on two populism accounts
Empirical study by Norris and
Theoretical account by Ernesto Laclau (decades) saw an
of different demands
2. Populism Explained: Economic Insecurity or Cultural Backlash?
Three distinct elements
Two distinct axes: economic and cultural.
1) the rules of the game
Norris and Inglehart argue that the latter is the most convincing argument: “We believe that these are the groups most likely to feel that they have become strangers from the predominant values in their own country, left behind by progressive tides of cultural change which they do not share… The silent revolution of the 1970s appears to have spawned an angry and resentful counter-revolutionary backlash today.”
One wonders whether the authors don’t seriously underestimate the threat right-wing populism poses to the institutions of liberal-democracy in the United States. A worrying inference that the authors explicitly draw from their progressivist premises is that populism will eventually die out. The study therefore fails to sufficiently appreciate the ways in which populist governments seek to institutionalize their agendas, thereby changing the rules of the game. This has become most drastically evident in the case of Poland, for example, in which Andrzej Duda (leader of the right-populist Law and Justice party) has significantly limited the autonomy of the judicial branch of government. Other such examples abound.
3. Neoliberal globalization is comprised of four processes:
1) accumulation by dispossession 2) de-regulation
Together they have increased economic
insecurity and cultural anxiety by
Anxiety from neoliberal globalization has ammunition right and left populists.
Neither Norris and Inglehart nor Laclau adequately account for such insecurity in their theorization of populism.
“the people” are differentially deployed by right and left and they themselves must be understood in terms of the respective enemies through which “the people” is constructed. And this is the decisive dimension of populism.
defines "the people" as those confronting an
defines the enemy in personalized terms
Summary of Summary
Nazism And Neoliberal Mythmaking
Populism is not
an economic distribution complaint, it is driven by 3 decades of market
Important Question, is
Kantian Morality enough for the Public Sector enough, especially since
some think it is too much!
Note: Michael wants more that Kant. Kant is enough.
Part 7 Predictions
1. Working Properly, our mixed economy will react and create a more equitable Income Distribution.
2. If Not, Deep Do Do
3. Historically low interest rates will continue.
4. Governments spent $15 trillion buying bad loans.
5. Capitalism will survive as being "fragile", it gains from external shocks.