We had a server outage, and we're rebuilding the site. Some of the site features won't work. Thank you for your patience.
imc indymedia

Los Angeles Indymedia : Activist News

white themeblack themered themetheme help
About Us Contact Us Calendar Publish RSS
latest news
best of news




A-Infos Radio

Indymedia On Air

Dope-X-Resistance-LA List


IMC Network:

Original Cities

www.indymedia.org africa: ambazonia canarias estrecho / madiaq kenya nigeria south africa canada: hamilton london, ontario maritimes montreal ontario ottawa quebec thunder bay vancouver victoria windsor winnipeg east asia: burma jakarta japan korea manila qc europe: abruzzo alacant andorra antwerpen armenia athens austria barcelona belarus belgium belgrade bristol brussels bulgaria calabria croatia cyprus emilia-romagna estrecho / madiaq euskal herria galiza germany grenoble hungary ireland istanbul italy la plana liege liguria lille linksunten lombardia london madrid malta marseille nantes napoli netherlands nice northern england norway oost-vlaanderen paris/Île-de-france patras piemonte poland portugal roma romania russia saint-petersburg scotland sverige switzerland thessaloniki torun toscana toulouse ukraine united kingdom valencia latin america: argentina bolivia chiapas chile chile sur cmi brasil colombia ecuador mexico peru puerto rico qollasuyu rosario santiago tijuana uruguay valparaiso venezuela venezuela oceania: adelaide aotearoa brisbane burma darwin jakarta manila melbourne perth qc sydney south asia: india mumbai united states: arizona arkansas asheville atlanta austin baltimore big muddy binghamton boston buffalo charlottesville chicago cleveland colorado columbus dc hawaii houston hudson mohawk kansas city la madison maine miami michigan milwaukee minneapolis/st. paul new hampshire new jersey new mexico new orleans north carolina north texas nyc oklahoma philadelphia pittsburgh portland richmond rochester rogue valley saint louis san diego san francisco san francisco bay area santa barbara santa cruz, ca sarasota seattle tampa bay tennessee urbana-champaign vermont western mass worcester west asia: armenia beirut israel palestine process: fbi/legal updates mailing lists process & imc docs tech volunteer projects: print radio satellite tv video regions: oceania united states topics: biotech

Surviving Cities

www.indymedia.org africa: canada: quebec east asia: japan europe: athens barcelona belgium bristol brussels cyprus germany grenoble ireland istanbul lille linksunten nantes netherlands norway portugal united kingdom latin america: argentina cmi brasil rosario oceania: aotearoa united states: austin big muddy binghamton boston chicago columbus la michigan nyc portland rochester saint louis san diego san francisco bay area santa cruz, ca tennessee urbana-champaign worcester west asia: palestine process: fbi/legal updates process & imc docs projects: radio satellite tv
printable version - js reader version - view hidden posts - tags and related articles

Criticism of Economists

by Thomas Trares Wednesday, Nov. 30, 2011 at 1:34 PM

Economists with their models could predict the values of economic variables but did not foresee the greatest worldwide economic crisis in 80 years. Mechanical-deterministic neoclassicism is a self-contained theoretical model offering simple answers.


By Thomas Trares

[This article published on October 27, 2011 is translated from the German on the Internet, http://www.spiegelfechter.com/wordpress/7102/okonomenkritik. Thomas Trares is an economist and free journalist.]

Since the outbreak of the financial crisis, the guild of economists has fallen into disgrace. The list of reproaches is long and includes unrealistic assumptions, false predictions, model fixation and a nave market faith. On Spiegel Online, the economist Hanno Beck reacted to the criticism. His apologetic is strange. He rejects the criticism that markets never functioned and that predictions need not always be exact. No one actually made this criticism of economists. Beck does not tackle really important questions of our time about how banks could become too big to fail. His explanations reveal the dilemma of mainstream economists. With their ways of thinking, they do not understand, do not want to understand or cannot rightly sort out the truth.

Why is this? Neoclassicism, the doctrine held by most economists, has its roots in the 19th century. Classical mechanics set the tone in physics at that time. The Newtonian laws of movement were its foundation. The Galilean law of falling bodies or the Keplerian planetary laws are also well-known. With these, the movement of bodies in space can be exactly calculated in advance. One thinks of a pendulum or the rotation of planets in the solar system. The formal elegance and exactness of classical mechanics had a great influence on economists at that time. They wanted to create a structure of economic theory with the same mathematical finesse. The British economist William Stanley Jevons once described economics as the mechanics of benefits and self-interest. Analogous to a mechanical system that is constantly in movement, the neoclassicists understood the economy as an eternal cycle of production and consumption kept in balance by a flexible price mechanism. The authority of market laws was accepted as universal here and now and in all eternity. The market function as a quasi-natural law, people thought.

Up to today, this mechanical-deterministic view of the world has nested in the heads of most economists. When the price rises, demand falls, unemployment increases and wages are knocked down again. The whole market theory is built according to this mechanical logic. This theory does have some relevance. Markets are efficient under certain conditions. Day after day, many markets function according to this model like the vegetable markets in thousands of cities, as Beck writes in his apologetic, the car industry or provision of the population with bread.

But their theorizing becomes dangerous when economists postulate the universal authority of market laws and apply them where they are no longer in effect or were long annulled. The best example is the financial crisis. This should not really have occurred according to neoclassical doctrine. Becks blames politics for this. Catastrophes often arise through false or misguided regulations, not through deficient regulation. The example of banks that are everything other than unregulated demonstrates this, the professor writes. He does not mention that the failure of the financial markets could also be referred back to destabilizing herd conduct, lack of transparency, information asymmetries, market manipulation and market power.

Their mechanical-deterministic view of the world makes it impossible for mainstream economists to recognize abnormal trends in the course of time. Time in neoclassicism is ahistorical and plays no role since the system always functions according to the same rules. Therefore economic growth is always the same economic growth with the same quality in the 19th and 21st centuries. But that is obviously a fallacy. 200 years ago the world was still empty, goods production was low and the population poverty-stricken according to todays standards. Ozone hole, climate change and resource scarcity were unknown terms at that time. Today the economic system glaringly strikes its limits. But a fundamental criticism of the growth paradigm does not occur in the guild. A little group of ecological economists is an exception but gets hardly any hearing.

There is also a deficient evolutionary perspective to economists in financial market theory. They ignored what dangers could start from an inflated financial sector that banks were too big to fail. Why must the balance sheet of big banks be greater than the output of whole industrial states? How did it happen that the financial markets have more power than democratically elected governments? To economists, their market fixation blocks their view beyond their own plate. Thus the chaos theory could provide an explanation for the financial crisis. As the flapping of the wings of a butterfly in Brazil triggers a tornado in Texas, the sale of a toxic security in the US could unsettle big banks in Europe.

Belief in the market has assumed religious characteristics. Whoever does not share them does not have the faintest idea. This perspective is also clear in Becks article. He reproaches critics for never sticking their nose in an economics book. Therefore they erroneously assume that everything for economists turns around money or profit, Beck concludes. To economists, maximization of benefits, the question what improves my well-being? is central. Aha! That may be true but are these really the earth-shaking questions that people want economists to answer now? No, one does not need to read an economics book to identify the real contradictions. Economists in their models could predict the values of economic variables to several digits beyond the decimal point but did not foresee the greatest worldwide economic crisis in 80 years. This failure is manifest without reading economic treatises.

How can a theory with serious slips be held stubbornly? One point is certainly that neoclassicism is a self-contained theoretical model offering simple answers. Whoever has once understood market theory can always prescribe the eternal medicine: liberalization, privatization and deregulation! Clearly the market laws are universally valid. Malformations can always be explained as market-non-conformable conduct. The culprits are always quickly at hand, mostly politicians or unions. In addition, neoclassicism serves the interests of capital and big corporations, interests that are well-organized and financed.

Perhaps the current crisis will be the turning point that the economy will again take an example from physics. Physics has developed further since the 19th century. One thinks of thermodynamics, quantum mechanics and the theory of relativity. However neoclassicism persists in its thinking from 200 years ago.


Jackson, Andrew, Toward a Wages-Led Recovery, November 2011


Needs and Limits, 2010


Report this post as:
Share on: Twitter, Facebook, Google+

add your comments

Listed below are the 10 latest comments of 1 posted about this article.
These comments are anonymously submitted by the website visitors.
Corrected URL marc Wednesday, Nov. 30, 2011 at 7:11 PM
© 2000-2018 Los Angeles Independent Media Center. Unless otherwise stated by the author, all content is free for non-commercial reuse, reprint, and rebroadcast, on the net and elsewhere. Opinions are those of the contributors and are not necessarily endorsed by the Los Angeles Independent Media Center. Running sf-active v0.9.4 Disclaimer | Privacy