I really don't give a flipping care about either of the three systems. Whichever system that is used better serve the people and be for the people to promote prosperity and civic order. With that said, my posting into this topic really has to do with my continual enjoyment on history and specifically the great depression in relationship to our current economic conditions. I want to direct us to a quote from WIKI and a few other sources including what is consider a newer approach called "New classical approach." I want to loosely and I use the term loosely because it is essentially that, that as the CEO wage goes up so does the capitalist wage and the working wage goes down, the disparity between the have and have not whether it is a communist system or a capitalist system creates tension between the rulilng class and the working class. You can call the ruling class capitalist in a capitalistic society and the working class as common wealth. Likewise for marxist system like communism, the ruling class are government official and the working class are the working class. Regardless, FAIRNESS is at play here so when fairness is not inbound people stop working hard, and sometimes people purposely sabatoge...pro
duction goes down, the cost to do business goes up, the cost rises to a level that nobody can afford and a death spiral begins.
Take a look at WIKI on the great depression. A quote there but the full article is here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_DepressionTake a look at CEO pay. Notice how the disparity of wealth being share results in a systemic breakdown? This is not mathematics or economics...Th
is is hunter and gathering 101 - ANTHROPOLOGY.
http://www.aflcio.org/corporatewatch/paywatch/Current theories may be broadly classified into two main points of view and several heterodox points of view. First, there are demand-driven theories, most importantly Keynesian economics, but also including those who point to the breakdown of international trade, and Institutional economists who point to underconsumpti on and over-investment (causing an economic bubble), malfeasance by bankers and industrialists, or incompetence by government officials. The consensus among demand-driven theories is that a large-scale loss of confidence led to a sudden reduction in consumption and investment spending. Once panic and deflation set in, many people believed they could avoid further losses by keeping clear of the markets. Holding money became profitable as prices dropped lower and a given amount of money bought ever more goods, exacerbating the drop in demand.
Secondly, there are the monetarists, who believe that the Great Depression started as an ordinary recession, but that significant policy mistakes by monetary authorities (especially the Federal Reserve), caused a shrinking of the money supply which greatly exacerbated the economic situation, causing a recession to descend into the Great Depression. Related to this explanation are those who point to debt deflation causing those who borrow to owe ever more in real terms.
Lastly, there are various heterodox theories that downplay or reject the explanations of the Keynesians and monetarists. For example, some new classical macroeconomist s have argued that various labor market policies imposed at the start caused the length and severity of the Great Depression. The Austrian school of economics focuses on the macroeconomic effects of money supply, and how central banking decisions can lead to over-investment (economic bubble).
Topic: Keynes, Mises and Marx (Read 411 times)