Skip to main content

Posts

Showing posts with the label “state intervention”

Back to Keynes for ‘the good life’

There is a new play in London’s West End at the moment. It’s called  The Standard of Living by James Graham . The play is about the famous British economist John Maynard Keynes . Graham thinks that Keynes offers an alternative to our money-making profit-led society.  “I’m absolutely convinced of that. You always feel that you have to fight for it but most people from my post-industrial working class community accept the intellectual argument that he  (Keynes)  made all those years ago; that [there should be] subsidy on something that doesn’t instantly make direct profit back, a painting, a play, a ballet, a song, that doesn’t have a value that is easily quantified on an Excel spreadsheet but adds to the value of a nation and to the meaning and happiness of it.” But unfortunately, we live in a world where ‘money, purchases and success’ dominate. Indeed, seats for Graham’s play are going for up to £298 (or nearly $400) – although there are some for the under-30s at ju...

‘Bidenomics’: Its Origins and Its Limitations

Is this shift sufficient to tackle the century’s social and ecological crises? Not nearly. Does it alter essential class relations? On the contrary: it strives to re-legitimize the social order. Is it unambiguous? No: while private finance has been kept out of new domestic infrastructure projects, the US is still driving privatization and deregulation in the global south and intensifying its new Cold War on China. Will it propel a new phase of economic expansion? I doubt it, due to the sheer scale of global overaccumulation and the fade-out of the industrialization bonanza. 1979 in Reverse

Ages of American Capitalism by Jonathan Levy

This book is definitely a must read. It implies though that there is no alternative to capitalism. State intervention should remedy the ills of the system. The review concludes with a typical misleading suggestion: “If Biden truly intends to establish a more just and egalitarian economic order, he would do well to consult both the achievements and the tragedies of U.S. development documented in Levy’s book.” The use of the comparative form implies that there is already a sort of ‘just and egalitarian economic order’, which an absurd thing to say. Biden could make that order more just and egalitarian. Why does one not just state: “if Biden truly intends to establish a just and egalitarian order...”? Portrait of the United States as a Developing Country