Оглавление
Daniel H. Neilson. Minsky
Contents
Guide
Pages
Series Title. Key Contemporary Thinkers Series includes:
Minsky
Copyright page
Dedication
Acknowledgments
1 Introduction. Theory, history, discipline
Time, uncertainty, capitalism
Minsky as economist
The crisis of 2008
Note
2 Financial capitalism. The institutions
Evolving financial structures
The financial instability hypothesis
Coherence
Before and after the “moment”
3 A payments theory of finance. Capitalism and payment
Survival constraint
Position-making and cash kickers
Economizing on reserves
4 The inadequacy of economics. Iatrogenesis
Cash flow over income
Nominal over real
Liquidity over solvency
5 Making the market. Position-making and liquidity
Dealing and initiative
Supply and demand
Market liquidity, funding liquidity, and monetary liquidity
Interpreting Keynes
6 Last resort. The endpoint of position-making
Centrality and discretion
Validation
Regulation and uncertainty
7 The resilience of economics. Anticipation of crisis
Breaking point
Memory of crisis
8 Minsky for all moments. Financialization
Disciplinarity and study
Minsky’s economics
Bibliography
Index
POLITY END USER LICENSE AGREEMENT
Отрывок из книги
Daniel H. Neilson
I am grateful for and humbled by the work of three anonymous reviewers who read a quite rough version of the manuscript. I responded to many if not most of their suggestions in the text, sometimes by clarification rather than a change in course. I am likewise grateful for the editorial interventions of George Owers and Fiona Sewell at various stages of the process. The book is undoubtedly improved by all of these contributions, though I take responsibility for what remains.
.....
In this it seems helpful to regard the economics profession as a community united by a language. Economics has its lexicon of technical terms – or everyday terms with technical meanings – but also a vocabulary of mathematical models and statistical approaches. Together, these comprise the language of instruction in most economics undergraduate and especially PhD programs. Minsky certainly mastered the language to the satisfaction of the Harvard economics department, but later reflection, without regret, suggests that he still felt a language barrier, having “never really [become] strongly bound to [his] contemporaries in economics” (1985b, 213).
The resulting communication difficulties were clearly frustrating. Reviews of work by more mainstream authors open with complaints: “The combination of a critical attitude towards Arrow–Debreu and a positive view of Keynes led this reader to expect that an effort to develop an ‘alternative construction’ would follow… Alas, my high hopes were not validated” (1984c, 450; also 1981c). The reviews that follow are embedded in what are clearly rehearsals of Minsky’s own views; it is not hard to see how these jabs could be ignored by their targets.
.....
