Skip to main content

The Laws of Capitalism

Daron Acemoglu and James Robinson have written a critique of Thomas Piketty's Capital in the Twenty-First Century - it is available here (hat tip - Graham Brownlow). Like his hero Karl Marx, Piketty attempts to uncover the general laws of capitalism. The following quotation provides a summary of Acemoglu and Robinson's critique:
But Like Marx, Piketty goes wrong for a very simple reason. The quest for general laws of capitalism - or any economic system - is misguided because it is a-institutional. It ignores that it is the institutions and political equilibrium of a society that determine how technology evolves, how markets function, and how the gains from various different economic arrangements are distributed. Despite his erudition, ambition, and creativity, Marx was ultimately led astray because of his disregard of institutions and politics. The same is true of Piketty.

Popular posts from this blog

How Valuable Are Connections?

Daron Acemoglu, Simon Johnson, Amir Kermani, James Kwak and Todd Mitton have written a paper on whether firms connected to Timothy Geithner benefited from these connections. They do so by looking at how stocks of these firms reacted to the announcement that he was a nominee for Treasury Secretary in November 2008. They find that there were large abnormal returns for connected firms. Below is the paper's abstract and the full paper is available here . The announcement of Timothy Geithner as nominee for Treasury Secretary in November 2008 produced a cumulative abnormal return for financial firms with which he had a connection. This return was about 6% after the first full day of trading and about 12% after ten trading days. There were subsequently abnormal negative returns for connected firms when news broke that Geithner's confirmation might be derailed by tax issues. Excess returns for connected firms may reflect the perceived impact of relying on the advice of a small ne...

Boom and Bust: A Global History of Financial Bubbles

Boom and Bust: A Global History of Financial Bubbles, co-authored with my colleague Will Quinn , is forthcoming in August. It is published by Cambridge University Press and is available for pre-order at Amazon , Barnes and Noble , Waterstones and Cambridge University Press . 

Money, Money, Money

In my copious spare time, I am a notaphilist (i.e., a collector of bank notes).  In the not too distant past, individual banks issued their own notes.  However, today, apart from in N. Ireland and Scotland, central banks around the world have a monopoly of the note issue in most economies.   At Feb. 2011, Northern Irish and Scottish banks had a staggering £1,900m and £3,500m of notes in circulation respectively.   As regular travellers across the Irish Sea realise, these notes are not legal tender.   What is special about banks in N. Ireland and Scotland that they can issue their own notes?  Simply, it is an accident of history.  As legislation was passed which centralised the note issue in England in the Bank of England, Scottish and Irish banks were given certain exemptions.  The result today is that these banks can issue their own notes. N. Irish and Scottish Banks, however, have to hold backing assets (i.e., Bank of England reserve...