i just read a good piece in the nation. it’s somewhat long, but interesting. neoclassical economics is so dominant in the field, and so pervasive in our cultural understanding of our own economic agency (which in our society is equivalent to who we are). the more i look at the theory that markets, free of interference, will ultimately make the most optimal economic choices, the less i believe in its completeness. there are too many qualifiers that need to be applied and assumptions to be held to make the data fit the model. and besides when was the last time you saw a market free of interference?
heterodoxy in economics
One response to “heterodoxy in economics”
I’ve always thought of the analogy of a train engine. Sure, you can build in all sorts of bitchin’ motive power, but without brakes, it’s just going to go faster and faster until it either runs out of fuel or off the rails.
As for the passenger compartments, you can either build them for maximum profit efficiency (empty boxes, just stuff the ticketholders in like cattle) or you can make some basic accomodations to protecting the dignity and safety of the lives inside.
Though, granted, I’m not really sure what an anarcho-syndicalist railway would look like. 🙂