The efficacy of macroeconomic policies in resolving financial market disequilibria: A cross-country analysis

This study attempts to evaluate the efficacy of macroeconomic policies in resolving financial market disequilibria and to elucidate the influence of the political landscape and global financial integration on the policymaking process. The current investigation examines three macroeconomic policies (i) government spending, (ii) liquidity provision and (iii) central bank interest rates by analysing 21 countries around the globe. The results suggest that government spending is a suboptimal macroeconomic policy for mitigating imbalances in financial markets, as it may have destabilizing effects. Liquidity provision was found to be ineffective in facilitating financial market stability whereas the adjustment of interest rates was found to be a viable tool for mitigating financial market imbalances. Therefore, an appropriate policy framework would comprise the following: prudent government spending, conditional liquidity provision and a reduction in interest rates following the development of financial market disequilibria. Furthermore, this study found strong evidence against the notion that political orientations influence policy frameworks which were designed to redress financial market disequilibria. This study also found that global financial integration does not influence the policymaking process

Social surplus approach and heterodox economics

Given the emphasis on social provisioning in heterodox economics, two of its central theoretical organizing principles are the concepts of the total social product and the social surplus. This appears to link heterodox economics to the social surplus approach associated with the classical economists and currently with Sraffian economists. However, heterodox economics connects agency with the social surplus and the social product, which the Sraffians reject as they take the level and composition of the social product as given. Therefore the different theoretical approach regarding the social surplus taken in heterodox economics may generate a different but similar way of theorizing about a capitalist economy. To explore this difference is the aim of the paper. Thus the paper is divided into four parts and a conclusion. In the first section social provisioning and the social surplus is introduced. In the second section, the Sraffian social surplus approach is delineated while in the third section the heterodox social surplus approach is delineated. In the fourth section of the paper, some of the implications emerging from the differences between the two approaches are discussed. The paper is concluded in the final section

Thomas Piketty, the future of capitalism and the theory of distribution: a review essay Thomas Piketty, the Future of Capitalism and the theory of Distribution: a Review Essay

Abstract This essay reviews Thomas Piketty's Capital in the Twenty-First Century (2014). The focus is upon the conceptual framework and theoretical interpretation of the empirical findings assembled in the book, rather than those empirical findings themselves (which are, in any case, broadly incontestable). The core theoretical logic of the distributional dynamics is explained and subjected to scrutiny with respect to the theory of distribution in particular, but also the theory of growth