Pub Date : 2021-09-17DOI: 10.1080/05775132.2021.1967619
Max Ehrenfreund
{"title":"Reviewed Work: Trade Wars Are Class Wars: How Rising Inequality Distorts the Global Economy and Threatens International Peace","authors":"Max Ehrenfreund","doi":"10.1080/05775132.2021.1967619","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/05775132.2021.1967619","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":88850,"journal":{"name":"Challenge (Atlanta, Ga.)","volume":"94 1","pages":"460 - 463"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80647304","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-09-06DOI: 10.1080/05775132.2021.1973283
Richard F. America
Abstract Most of Africa struggles to improve daily life, and reduce or eliminate deep poverty. Household income and wealth are stuck at low levels. Public policies are unable to accelerate investment and growth, employment creation, and food production and security, housing, health care, and educational access and success, for the majority. The Fundamental, underlying reason for these lagging conditions is 500 years of unjust enrichment by Western, Northern, and lately, Asian actors. They abused their dominance, and captured excess benefits from trade, investment and other activities. The author proposes the orderly, disciplined, targeted return of the $20–$40 trillion of unjust enrichment, in grants to sectors identified as key to economic development.
{"title":"Restitution to Africa: Unjust Enrichment and Damages from Imperial, Colonial, and Post Colonial Abuse of Dominance","authors":"Richard F. America","doi":"10.1080/05775132.2021.1973283","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/05775132.2021.1973283","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Most of Africa struggles to improve daily life, and reduce or eliminate deep poverty. Household income and wealth are stuck at low levels. Public policies are unable to accelerate investment and growth, employment creation, and food production and security, housing, health care, and educational access and success, for the majority. The Fundamental, underlying reason for these lagging conditions is 500 years of unjust enrichment by Western, Northern, and lately, Asian actors. They abused their dominance, and captured excess benefits from trade, investment and other activities. The author proposes the orderly, disciplined, targeted return of the $20–$40 trillion of unjust enrichment, in grants to sectors identified as key to economic development.","PeriodicalId":88850,"journal":{"name":"Challenge (Atlanta, Ga.)","volume":"17 1","pages":"406 - 412"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87033516","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-04DOI: 10.1080/05775132.2021.1932143
R. Hockett
Abstract I argue that central banks cannot perform their familiar function of modulating credit-money aggregates without engaging in at least some degree of credit-allocation - specifically, to productive rather than speculative projects - on their own or in collaboration with finance ministries. I show further that the “spread Fed” in the U.S., operative from 1913 to 1935 and working in close collaboration with Treasury, did just that, and that it was error to end rather than supplement this practice. That error in turn stemmed from a misdiagnosis of where the Fed had gone wrong during the early 1930s. The Fed had gone wrong not in thinking “real bills” discounting necessary to good allocation and modulation of credit, but in thinking it sufficient. For while much of the money supply is endogenous as Wicksell taught, some of it is not - as Wicksell also taught. In future, the Fed will have to return to its allocative pre-1935 focus on productive investment facilitated by regional Fed discounting on the one hand, while retaining its modulatory post-1935 apparatus (FOMC, FRBNY Trading Desk, etc.) for counteracting exogenous shocks to the money supply on the other hand. It will have to attend, in other words, both to Wicksellian “bank money” and to Wicksellian “cumulative processes.” I call the upshot a “Spread,” “Wicksellian,” or “Two-Bladed Scissors” Fed.
{"title":"The Once and Future Fed – and Treasury","authors":"R. Hockett","doi":"10.1080/05775132.2021.1932143","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/05775132.2021.1932143","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract I argue that central banks cannot perform their familiar function of modulating credit-money aggregates without engaging in at least some degree of credit-allocation - specifically, to productive rather than speculative projects - on their own or in collaboration with finance ministries. I show further that the “spread Fed” in the U.S., operative from 1913 to 1935 and working in close collaboration with Treasury, did just that, and that it was error to end rather than supplement this practice. That error in turn stemmed from a misdiagnosis of where the Fed had gone wrong during the early 1930s. The Fed had gone wrong not in thinking “real bills” discounting necessary to good allocation and modulation of credit, but in thinking it sufficient. For while much of the money supply is endogenous as Wicksell taught, some of it is not - as Wicksell also taught. In future, the Fed will have to return to its allocative pre-1935 focus on productive investment facilitated by regional Fed discounting on the one hand, while retaining its modulatory post-1935 apparatus (FOMC, FRBNY Trading Desk, etc.) for counteracting exogenous shocks to the money supply on the other hand. It will have to attend, in other words, both to Wicksellian “bank money” and to Wicksellian “cumulative processes.” I call the upshot a “Spread,” “Wicksellian,” or “Two-Bladed Scissors” Fed.","PeriodicalId":88850,"journal":{"name":"Challenge (Atlanta, Ga.)","volume":"3 1","pages":"280 - 291"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85417030","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-04DOI: 10.1080/05775132.2021.1950449
William Van Lear
Abstract This essay argues that there is a connection among modern stock market booms, the rising income inequality trend of the last four decades, and labor bargaining power. The essay also contends that the institutional and policy backdrop in any given economic era impacts the ability of economic actors and groups to influence their relative income standing, and therefore the political-economic structure matters. The basic argument is that there is an interplay between changes in wages relative to profits with stock valuations, that is, there exists a bidirectionality between income distribution and stock price booms. The paper offers an explanation for the major stock price run-ups in the 21st century.
{"title":"Stock Market Booms and Labor Bargaining Power","authors":"William Van Lear","doi":"10.1080/05775132.2021.1950449","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/05775132.2021.1950449","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This essay argues that there is a connection among modern stock market booms, the rising income inequality trend of the last four decades, and labor bargaining power. The essay also contends that the institutional and policy backdrop in any given economic era impacts the ability of economic actors and groups to influence their relative income standing, and therefore the political-economic structure matters. The basic argument is that there is an interplay between changes in wages relative to profits with stock valuations, that is, there exists a bidirectionality between income distribution and stock price booms. The paper offers an explanation for the major stock price run-ups in the 21st century.","PeriodicalId":88850,"journal":{"name":"Challenge (Atlanta, Ga.)","volume":"8 1","pages":"292 - 302"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"74058600","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-04DOI: 10.1080/05775132.2021.1959783
G. Tassey
Abstract This paper responds to a multi-decade decline in the rate of U.S. economic growth by proposing a four-element technology-based growth policy, emphasizing productivity as the key policy target. Multiple indicators are presented to demonstrate the negative impacts of declining investment in key growth variables. The length of the U.S. decline, although in some cases not the magnitude, has also been experienced by most western economies, so the following discussion has broad relevance. In the U.S. case, a decline in productivity growth has resulted not only in slower income growth but also in increased income inequality. The consequence has been varying degrees of social and political turmoil, which has been accentuated by policy mistakes, such as imposition of tariffs and withdrawal from international trade agreements. The growth policy problem is explained in terms of systematic underinvestment in four major categories of economic assets—technology, capital formation (hardware and software), skilled labor, and technology-based infrastructure—that are required to drive long-term productivity growth. Economic growth policy research has for decades emphasized investment in technology (R&D) and a rather strained extension to economic impact. The reason for the conceptual inadequacy is the fact that three other major asset categories are critical to achieving sustained economic growth: capital formation, skilled labor, and technical infrastructure. These latter three asset classes are absolutely essential to the technology-based economy, but they receive incomplete attention at best. Failure to adopt this four-asset growth model has greatly constrained rates of growth in general and particularly in workers’ incomes over the past 40 years.
{"title":"A Productivity-Focused Growth Policy Model","authors":"G. Tassey","doi":"10.1080/05775132.2021.1959783","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/05775132.2021.1959783","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper responds to a multi-decade decline in the rate of U.S. economic growth by proposing a four-element technology-based growth policy, emphasizing productivity as the key policy target. Multiple indicators are presented to demonstrate the negative impacts of declining investment in key growth variables. The length of the U.S. decline, although in some cases not the magnitude, has also been experienced by most western economies, so the following discussion has broad relevance. In the U.S. case, a decline in productivity growth has resulted not only in slower income growth but also in increased income inequality. The consequence has been varying degrees of social and political turmoil, which has been accentuated by policy mistakes, such as imposition of tariffs and withdrawal from international trade agreements. The growth policy problem is explained in terms of systematic underinvestment in four major categories of economic assets—technology, capital formation (hardware and software), skilled labor, and technology-based infrastructure—that are required to drive long-term productivity growth. Economic growth policy research has for decades emphasized investment in technology (R&D) and a rather strained extension to economic impact. The reason for the conceptual inadequacy is the fact that three other major asset categories are critical to achieving sustained economic growth: capital formation, skilled labor, and technical infrastructure. These latter three asset classes are absolutely essential to the technology-based economy, but they receive incomplete attention at best. Failure to adopt this four-asset growth model has greatly constrained rates of growth in general and particularly in workers’ incomes over the past 40 years.","PeriodicalId":88850,"journal":{"name":"Challenge (Atlanta, Ga.)","volume":"23 1","pages":"314 - 342"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81105067","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-04DOI: 10.1080/05775132.2021.1967597
A. Mario
Abstract According to Modern Monetary Theory, a country that issues its own floating currency -and has no foreign exchange denominated debt- can simultaneously achieve both full employment and price stability through an Employer of Last Resort. The ELR is a policy option in which the government offers a job to anyone willing and able to work at the program's wage. Along with a zero interest rate policy, these prescriptions constitute MMT’s base case for analysis. Unfortunately, they are seldom considered as a whole by critics. Most criticisms of MMT emphasize the inflationary consequences of full employment policy. The author argues that, ultimately, it is the definition of full employment that seems to be the key when discussing the feasibility and desirability of an ELR program. Implementing an ELR program could result in an increase of the price level as measured by some index. Arguing that, as a consequence, full employment should not be pursued is tantamount to keep using unemployment to control the price level.
{"title":"MMT’s policy prescriptions in Small and Open Economies: Addressing some Controversies","authors":"A. Mario","doi":"10.1080/05775132.2021.1967597","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/05775132.2021.1967597","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract According to Modern Monetary Theory, a country that issues its own floating currency -and has no foreign exchange denominated debt- can simultaneously achieve both full employment and price stability through an Employer of Last Resort. The ELR is a policy option in which the government offers a job to anyone willing and able to work at the program's wage. Along with a zero interest rate policy, these prescriptions constitute MMT’s base case for analysis. Unfortunately, they are seldom considered as a whole by critics. Most criticisms of MMT emphasize the inflationary consequences of full employment policy. The author argues that, ultimately, it is the definition of full employment that seems to be the key when discussing the feasibility and desirability of an ELR program. Implementing an ELR program could result in an increase of the price level as measured by some index. Arguing that, as a consequence, full employment should not be pursued is tantamount to keep using unemployment to control the price level.","PeriodicalId":88850,"journal":{"name":"Challenge (Atlanta, Ga.)","volume":"19 1","pages":"361 - 376"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"83632974","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-04DOI: 10.1080/05775132.2021.1959782
T. Palley
Abstract This essay argues that some forty years ago the Republican Party struck a Faustian bargain whereby it traded tolerance and democratic integrity for tax cuts and a corporate dominated economy. Now, the Republican party is reaping the consequences of that bargain in the form of its capture by Donald Trump and his followers. However, it also means we are all threatened as the party has unleashed and legitimized proto-fascist tendencies that risk destroying democracy and tolerance, and replacing them with intolerance and authoritarianism. The U.S. is now fighting a war for its own soul. At issue are two core questions. One, will the U.S. remain committed to true democracy? Two, will the U.S. aspire to having a decent society with shared prosperity? The one upside of Trump and his purging of the old guard Republican Party is that he compels welcome clarification of those questions, which can no longer be evaded by the Democratic Party and the chattering class.
{"title":"Proto-Fascism Unleashed: How the Republican Party Sold Its Soul and Now Threatens Democracy","authors":"T. Palley","doi":"10.1080/05775132.2021.1959782","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/05775132.2021.1959782","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This essay argues that some forty years ago the Republican Party struck a Faustian bargain whereby it traded tolerance and democratic integrity for tax cuts and a corporate dominated economy. Now, the Republican party is reaping the consequences of that bargain in the form of its capture by Donald Trump and his followers. However, it also means we are all threatened as the party has unleashed and legitimized proto-fascist tendencies that risk destroying democracy and tolerance, and replacing them with intolerance and authoritarianism. The U.S. is now fighting a war for its own soul. At issue are two core questions. One, will the U.S. remain committed to true democracy? Two, will the U.S. aspire to having a decent society with shared prosperity? The one upside of Trump and his purging of the old guard Republican Party is that he compels welcome clarification of those questions, which can no longer be evaded by the Democratic Party and the chattering class.","PeriodicalId":88850,"journal":{"name":"Challenge (Atlanta, Ga.)","volume":"84 1","pages":"303 - 313"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77466383","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-04DOI: 10.1080/05775132.2021.1964793
C. Mosk
History repeats itself first as tragedy, second as farce.Karl MarxThe first point I wish to make about Malthus is his ideology. True, he was a remarkably able analytical economist, justifiably prou...
{"title":"The Industrial Reserve Army of Labor: Is It Time to Incorporate the Concept into Current Political Economy?","authors":"C. Mosk","doi":"10.1080/05775132.2021.1964793","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/05775132.2021.1964793","url":null,"abstract":"History repeats itself first as tragedy, second as farce.Karl MarxThe first point I wish to make about Malthus is his ideology. True, he was a remarkably able analytical economist, justifiably prou...","PeriodicalId":88850,"journal":{"name":"Challenge (Atlanta, Ga.)","volume":"45 1","pages":"343 - 360"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73567939","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-07-04DOI: 10.1080/05775132.2021.1996115
J. Madrick
Author Robert Hockett argues persuasively in his piece, “The Once and Future Fed,” that the Federal Reserve should allocate credit rather than just seek to control interest rates and inflation. In fact, he points out, the Fed once used to do that. An important piece. Is a booming stock market good or bad for labor power? William Van Lear explores the issues in his piece, “Stock Market Booms and Labor Bargaining Power.” Is there an upside to Trump’s capture of the Republican Party? Insightful economist Tom Palley says that it will at least force America to deal with the challenges that were launched with the Republican “Faustian bargain” with the wealthy beginning 40 years ago. He titles his piece, “Proto1⁄4 Fascism Unleashed.” The author insists it is time—and indeed possible—to target productivity growth as the most important objective of economic policy. Productivity has grown slowly for 40 years. Why do we tolerate it, asks Gregory Tassey in a critical piece, “A Productivity Focused Growth Model.” Can a federal employer-of-last-resort policy lead simultaneously to low unemployment and stable prices? This is a key tenet of modern monetary theory (MMT). Agustin Mario explores this and other issues as part of MMT.
{"title":"Letter from the Editor","authors":"J. Madrick","doi":"10.1080/05775132.2021.1996115","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/05775132.2021.1996115","url":null,"abstract":"Author Robert Hockett argues persuasively in his piece, “The Once and Future Fed,” that the Federal Reserve should allocate credit rather than just seek to control interest rates and inflation. In fact, he points out, the Fed once used to do that. An important piece. Is a booming stock market good or bad for labor power? William Van Lear explores the issues in his piece, “Stock Market Booms and Labor Bargaining Power.” Is there an upside to Trump’s capture of the Republican Party? Insightful economist Tom Palley says that it will at least force America to deal with the challenges that were launched with the Republican “Faustian bargain” with the wealthy beginning 40 years ago. He titles his piece, “Proto1⁄4 Fascism Unleashed.” The author insists it is time—and indeed possible—to target productivity growth as the most important objective of economic policy. Productivity has grown slowly for 40 years. Why do we tolerate it, asks Gregory Tassey in a critical piece, “A Productivity Focused Growth Model.” Can a federal employer-of-last-resort policy lead simultaneously to low unemployment and stable prices? This is a key tenet of modern monetary theory (MMT). Agustin Mario explores this and other issues as part of MMT.","PeriodicalId":88850,"journal":{"name":"Challenge (Atlanta, Ga.)","volume":"28 1","pages":"279 - 279"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89600316","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-05-04DOI: 10.1080/05775132.2021.1932138
Michael Madowitz, C. Weller
Abstract The consensus view is that the economy benefits most when Americans spend their stimulus checks on goods and services. But what if they saved the money, as many did? These authors argue that the benefits to mental health due to a financial cushion can also lead to a stronger economy. Mental health is, arguably, a new Keynesian variable
{"title":"Income or Wealth: What Did the 2020 Stimulus Mean for People’s Happiness and Why It Matters?","authors":"Michael Madowitz, C. Weller","doi":"10.1080/05775132.2021.1932138","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/05775132.2021.1932138","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The consensus view is that the economy benefits most when Americans spend their stimulus checks on goods and services. But what if they saved the money, as many did? These authors argue that the benefits to mental health due to a financial cushion can also lead to a stronger economy. Mental health is, arguably, a new Keynesian variable","PeriodicalId":88850,"journal":{"name":"Challenge (Atlanta, Ga.)","volume":"113 1","pages":"229 - 242"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-05-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77747506","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：