For too long, a talented economist, or at least one who got tenure, 
spent his time constructing models that, starting with implausible 
assumptions (we are all omniscient rational agents with perfect 
information about all prices past and future), made elegant and 
logically consistent conclusions. (It doesn’t matter whether a company 
is financed through debt or equity.) Whether these theories have any 
connection to the real world has little relevance to an economist’s 
professional success. Before the crash, most macroeconomic models didn’t 
even include a banking sector. That is like physics without gravity.

This trust in theory gives neoclassical economics a distinctly 
Panglossian flavor. As long as markets are free, we live in the best of 
all possible worlds. According to the orthodox economics taught 
undergraduates, every one of us — you, me, the bum pushing a cart full 
of Coke cans, Lady Gaga, Donald Rumsfeld, Rupert Murdoch — all earn 
precisely what we deserve. The logic is impeccable. No one would pay a 
worker more than they contribute to the firm’s bottom line, and no 
worker would labor for less than he makes the firm. Thus, assuming, as 
neoclassical economic models do, perfect competition and everyone’s 
omniscience of all probabilities, present and future, we each earn 
exactly the marginal productivity of our labor. Even entrepreneurs, 
ultimately, will earn precisely what their labor is worth, what a worker 
hired to do their labor would get paid.

That is because, in neoclassical economics, unlike real life, profits 
are merely a temporary phenomena. Any business making above average 
gains will draw in competitors, increasing supply and thus driving down 
the price until its profits reach the point of equilibrium, at which 
point its earnings are the same as those of every other businessman. 
This, I was told when I studied Econ 101 as a college freshman, was the 
justification of capitalism. No one gets to charge more than he 
deserves. Ultimately, all progress accrues to the consumer.

full: http://lareviewofbooks.org/essay/schumpeter
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to