In his 2012 book From Financial Crisis to Stagnation, Thomas Palley argued that the financial crisis of 2008 would be likely to result in a period of long-term stagnation. Both the crisis and the predicted stagnation, Palley argued, were the outcomes of policies pursued since the 1980s; the persistence of those policies explains the stagnation. Underpinning the policies and their consequences are the flaws of the neoliberal macro model and the particular role played by finance in that model. The rejection of Keynesianism meant the abandonment of the commitment to full employment. The neoliberal paradigm rests upon a foundation of ‘bad ideas’ which are located in political philosophy as much as in economic theory. Palley’s argument has a bearing on recent discussions among mainstream macroeconomists, whose interest in secular stagnation has been revived by the ‘ongoing crisis’. These discussions have left mostly unanswered the question of the causes of stagnation. The present essay argues that Palley’s concept of ‘structural Keynesianism’ can benefit from a closer association with the analysis of structural transformation and its effects on policy regimes and stagnation tendencies.
The Stagnation Tendencies of neoliberalism: A review Essay
Davide Gualerzi
2018
Abstract
In his 2012 book From Financial Crisis to Stagnation, Thomas Palley argued that the financial crisis of 2008 would be likely to result in a period of long-term stagnation. Both the crisis and the predicted stagnation, Palley argued, were the outcomes of policies pursued since the 1980s; the persistence of those policies explains the stagnation. Underpinning the policies and their consequences are the flaws of the neoliberal macro model and the particular role played by finance in that model. The rejection of Keynesianism meant the abandonment of the commitment to full employment. The neoliberal paradigm rests upon a foundation of ‘bad ideas’ which are located in political philosophy as much as in economic theory. Palley’s argument has a bearing on recent discussions among mainstream macroeconomists, whose interest in secular stagnation has been revived by the ‘ongoing crisis’. These discussions have left mostly unanswered the question of the causes of stagnation. The present essay argues that Palley’s concept of ‘structural Keynesianism’ can benefit from a closer association with the analysis of structural transformation and its effects on policy regimes and stagnation tendencies.
Pubblicazioni consigliate
I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
