Search

Neoclassical economic theories form the basis of modern economics, along with the principles of Keynesian economics. As part of economic theory, the main direction that reveals the functioning mechanism of a market economy is the neoclassical direction. In this regard, identifying the peculiarities of the relationship between the subject and method of the neoclassical direction is an urgent task, since it will make it possible to more clearly define the place of the neoclassical direction in modern economic thought, identify the theoretical basis and applicability of practical recommendations of neoclassics, in particular, more clearly define its capabilities as a theoretical basis for the formation market economy in different countries. In this article, the authors analyze the difference between neoclassical macroeconomics and microeconomics. It is shown that the microeconomic aspects of neoclassical theory have much greater theoretical and applied significance than neoclassical macroeconomics. They largely reflect real economic processes and determine the economic behavior of economic entities. The work examines, in a microeconomic aspect, the theoretical approaches of the main representatives of neoclassical theory, such as A. Marshall, L. von Mises and other representatives, to the analysis of economic processes. The authors note the importance of limit analysis, which has not only theoretical but also practical significance. The work also examines the approaches of representatives of neoclassical theory to assessing the value and price of goods and economic resources. In the real economy, markets of imperfect competition predominate, which are characterized by their own characteristics that influence the economic behavior of firms in commodity and resource markets, as evidenced by the use of marginal analysis to substantiate the position of the authors. The article assesses the views of representatives of the neoclassical school on the differences between market and planned economies. Their approach to the process of economic monopolization is characterized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The economisation of social policy implied the emergence of neoclassical economics as a contestant for the foundation of social policy in theory and practice. A crucial phase in this process is the emergence of the international competition state paradigm, which urges governments to cut taxes, reduce generosity and tighten eligibility criteria for social security benefits. The adoption of the competition state paradigm reversed social policy in advanced welfare states, which used to balance the injustices of capitalism through an expansion of social citizenship rights. In Nordic welfare states, such as Denmark and Finland the advance of the competition state paradigm resulted in a clash with the constitution, which seeks to guarantee a minimum standard of living for all citizens. The economisation and subsequent reversal of the purpose of social policy was followed by increasing social inequality and a more general development characterised by a series of crises in the areas of economy, health, politics, environment, security, and global mobility. A seed of this development is endogenous, or internal, in other words, and lies in the representation of the human being associated with neoclassical economics and the competition state paradigm, according to which the pleasure-seeking human being is a potential free-rider and lazy idler in need of subordination and control. The article distinguishes between exogenous (or external) and endogenous (or internal) aspects of welfare state change and highlights our role as citizens and academics in both creating and resolving challenges related to societal development. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Gharee for Economics & Administration Sciences is the property of Republic of Iraq Ministry of Higher Education & Scientific Research (MOHESR) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This article is an interview with Dr. Iván Bélyácz, a retired professor and member of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences. Dr. Bélyácz discusses various topics, including the adverse consequences of the market economy overtaking the real economy, the rise in inequality, and the importance of science in combating unscientific views. He also talks about the potential benefits and challenges of artificial intelligence and the need for a holistic understanding of risk and uncertainty in economic decision-making. Dr. Bélyácz reflects on his career as a researcher and emphasizes the importance of publishing and teaching in his field. He concludes by discussing his current work on the economics of risk and uncertainty and the need for a contextual understanding of financial and economic history. [Extracted from the article]