Search

This paper examines pay inequality in Turkish manufacturing annually from 1980 to 2001. Using the between-group component of Theil's T statistic, we decompose the evolution of inequality by geographic region, province, sub-sector and by East-West distinction both for private and public sectors. The decompositions show that while inequality remains approximately the same between regions, it increases in the late 1980s in the private sector between provinces, between East and West, and as well as between manufacturing sub-sectors.

In this paper, the author ventures into the nether wastes of economics, and attempts a brief survey of the main currents that didn't get it wrong. He looks at the failure of the nation's leading academic economists to understand the current financial crisis or the shaky underpinnings of the nation's financial system. The author's method consists of surveying his own habitual reading, augmented by suggestions from a large list of economists. Many of the examples given in the paper were volunteered, at his request, by their authors or by admirers of those authors. He has documented that there is a considerable, rich, promising body of economics, theory and evidence, entirely suited to the study of the real economy and its enormous problems. This work is significant in ways in which the entire corpus of mainstream economics--including recent fashions like the new "behavioral economics"--simply is not. The author argues that there is an urgent need to expand the academic space and the public visibility of ongoing work that is of actual value when faced with the many deep problems of economic life. It is to make possible careers in those areas, and for people with those perspectives, that have been proven worthy by events. (Contains 19 endnotes and a bibliography.)

The multipolar financial world is here. The architects are not Russia or China, but the hapless strategic leadership of the United States, informed by mainstream economics. The United States can survive it—whereas Europe may not—but only with major political and economic changes at home. These include definancialization and demilitarization, but first and foremost, a willingness to realize that the world has changed and that global hegemony based on neoliberal principles has failed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hence, starting with the original Maastricht Treaty and the various binding treaties of the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU) that ensued, according to Alain, this constraining structure imposed on national governments a "market" discipline that would destroy the "real" economy. Like Marx, Alain saw the state in its predatory role in favouring the private wealth accumulation of the economically powerful, and like Keynes he also saw the state in its role as a potential source of stability in reducing social anxiety and predation by promoting genuine social progress. Alain, on the contrary, fully embraced a theory of endogenous money, and as Lavoie ([4], p. 13) suggests, Alain was close to the horizontalist view of money as defended by Basil Moore ([5]). We have lost a truly special friend, Alain Parguez, who passed away peacefully on 5 April 2022, in Paris, at the age of 81. [Extracted from the article]

3 See my review, "What's Left of Cambridge Economics?" Geoffrey Harcourt had published on the Cambridge-Cambridge capital controversies, saving graduate students enormous trouble. But within a decade or so, the great window of academic effervescence and free thought that had been Cambridge economics would shut. [Extracted from the article]