Studying Economics
- This topic has 21 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 10 years, 11 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2013/oct/24/students-post-crash-economics
The University of Manchester have formed the Post-Crash Economics Society, which they hope will be copied by universities across the country. The organisers criticise university courses for doing little to explain why economists failed to warn about the global financial crisis and for having too heavy a focus on training students for City jobs. The society plans to publish a manifesto proposing sweeping reforms to the University of Manchester's curriculum, with the hope that other institutions will follow suit.Joe Earle, a spokesman for the Post-Crash Economics Society and a final-year undergraduate, said academic departments were "ignoring the crisis" and that, by neglecting global developments and critics of the free market such as Keynes and Marx, the study of economics was "in danger of losing its broader relevance".
Wouldn't it be a joy if our local Manchester branch established contact and managed some input.
I did with the following link for them to look at:http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/education/depth-articles/economics/economists-not-planetHere's their reply if anyone would like to follow up:Thanks so much for your email. We will certainly look at the article you have sent, it is much appreciated. Please feel free to contact us in future with any suggestions. If you are interested in writing for our blog or coming to any events please don't hesitate to get in touch. Many thanks Post-Crash Economics.
Well done, Kohara. I did follow up with a blog submission. So far , no reply but a refusal doesn't offend. There appears to be an achievable opportunity opening up in the field of economics that we should try and get our foot in the door. The Guardian carries another story of how the orthodox academic economists are being questioned. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/28/mainstream-economics-denial-world-changed But once more, there is the risk that the revolutionary alternatives will be submerged by proponents of "radical" bourgeois economics as what took place with Occupy. Where there is a vacuum, others will fill it. We already have Marxist Economic Study Education Notes which could be updated with a few additions to it and then one of our university-centred members could get the data-base for e-mailing it to every economics lecturer and department in the country. This isn't spamming but reaching out to a targeted audience. It's about once more imposing our mark on an area of our expertise and making available our unique analyses. Any responses to such a email-out would then be saved and each new appropriate economics article in future Standards be sent to them, as a matter of course. A relatively easy task to maintain doing and again can be done by a internet-connected isolated, secluded, house-bound member in spare time once the data-base is available. If it works for economics then it can be expanded to include other university disciplines.
I see you have to be (or are supposed to be) a student to join in, but have we any members who are students of economics? Probably not, as economics these days seems to be a branch of business studies. Not like in the olden days (i.e. the 1980s and before).
ALB wrote:I see you have to be (or are supposed to be) a student to join in, but have we any members who are students of economics? Probably not, as economics these days seems to be a branch of business studies. Not like in the olden days (i.e. the 1980s and before).Yes I'm an undergrad PPE student. I'll check it out..
I note that a video by Positive Money is already on their blog. http://www.post-crasheconomics.com/blog/ One reason i think the money-cranks are so popular is that they turned out some very watchable videos – (hint, hint)
Studying Economics at any university it would be like studying business administration. At the University of Puerto Rico economics is part of the School of Social Science, but it is also based on Econometrics which is mostly the study of statistics,Several years ago Capital was part of the curriculum of the School of Economics of the University Autonomy of Santo Domingo, but in that period of time the University Senate was controlled by members of Leninist , Hoxhaist, and Maoist organizations. The old days of Political Economy are gone. It is like we said in an article about Economists: They are not from this world
It seems there does appear to be a re-accessment of economics in academia. Another article herehttp://www.theguardian.com/education/2013/nov/10/economics-lecturers-accused-university-courses "The Treasury is hosting a conference in London on Monday to discuss the crisis in economics teaching, which critics say has remained largely unchanged since the 2008 financial crash despite the failure of many in the profession to spot the looming credit crunch and worst recession for 100 years.Michael Joffe, professor of economics at Imperial College, London, said he was disturbed by the way economics textbooks continued to discuss concepts and models as facts when they were debunked decades ago." I contacted Post-Crash Economics with a blog submission which was politely declined but they did say they are happy for some sort of meeting to be held with ourselves. Hopefully Manchester Br can follow it up. But perhaps we could meantime re-vamp an economics pamphlet, bring it up to date with recent events. As i suggested, it can be emailed to all the various university economic departments. I am sure there is a address list available to make it possible.
Just emailed Professor Joffee a link to this article (the same one kohara sent Post-Crash Economics):http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/education/depth-articles/economics/economists-not-planetHe should like the title "Economists: Not on this Planet".
The economists strike back. "This could be the golden age of economics…This is a great time to be an economist…" http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/74cd0b94-4de6-11e3-8fa5-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2kx7RhGKp
ALB wrote:Just emailed Professor Joffee a link to this article (the same one kohara sent Post-Crash Economics):http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/education/depth-articles/economics/economists-not-planetHe should like the title "Economists: Not on this Planet".I got a friendly enough reply from him and an electronic copy of an article of his on "The root cause of economic growth under capitalism". He identifies this as competition to cut costs by "firms", defined as legal and continuing bodies employing wage-labour and producing for profit. He distinguishes "firms" from others producing for the market which he calls variously "sole traders", "sole producers" or "petty producers", basically single person or family production units.The difference with Marx mentioned in the abstract of the article seems to be that Joffe does not accept the averaging of the rate of profit which he sees as neither empirically confirmed nor necessary to explain how capitalism works.He says in passing (and presumably this is his criticism of economics as taught today) that Adam Smith analysed an economy mainly made up of such producers, as was indeed the case in his day but has long since ceased to be, yet theoretical economics still assumes that it is. Following Smith's premise means that the economy is conceived of in terms of trading, of such producers exchanging their products on the market to meet their needs. According to Joffe, Smith's framework cannot explain growth; in fact to the extent that growth occurs in such an economy it is by the emergence and spread of "firms" that outcompete the sole traders and lead to a different type of economy. It seems a fair enough criticism of the arguments used by apologists for capitalism, such as the self-styled Adam Smith Institute, to defend capitalism. Certainly most street-level defenders of capitalism assume that it is still based on individuals, including workers, trading what they have to sell to get what they need, when it's actually a system of capital accumulation driven by competition between profit-seeking firms and in which therefore profits always come before needs..
The Post-Crash Economics Society at Manchester University has just been discussed on Radio 4 news this morning, with one commentator worried that 'the baby will be thrown out with the bathwater' if economics courses are redesigned. He is clinging to the belief that data can be used to predict variations in the economy. If he needs predictions, than I can help. I predict that there will be economic peaks and depressions, that wealth will continue to be concentrated into the hands of the '1%', and that the majority of the worlds people will continue to be forced to work for a pittance in order to survive, and to generate profits for the '1%'. There, can I have an economics degree now please.
BTSomerset wrote:The Post-Crash Economics Society at Manchester University has just been discussed on Radio 4 news this morning, with one commentator worried that 'the baby will be thrown out with the bathwater' if economics courses are redesigned.The real theoretical problem here is the very name of the group. There is no such activity or study as 'economics'. That, itself, is an ideological choice, to call the society an 'economics' group.They should immediately rename it 'The Post-Crash Socio-Economics Society'.Then the clowns worrying about the 'bathwater' will be told that the 'baby' has been reintroduced, not 'thrown out'.'Economics' is the study of 'bathwater'. The sooner these dim academics learn what any worker already knows, the better for their universities.
Here's something for the new study group to get there teeth into. Part of a talk by Peter Joseph on how the production and distribution of wealth could be organised without money, price or exchange:https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=K9FDIne7M9o#t=1h11mIt's full of graphs and formulas, as modern economists like.
Hey guys,Good to see you talking about us! Just dropped by to make a couple of points:- Sorry for the delay in replying to emails and the slightly tinned responses. We have been indundated since the Guardian article and are all full time, mostly third year stuydents, so we haven't had much chance to get on top of things like that. However, one member is taking a year out starting January so hopefully we'll be more responsive from then on. Please don't hesitate to email us again.- We agree economics isn't a separate field and one of the key things we want is context (political, historical, ethical). Having said that, sometimes you have to compromise and go for the catchiest name.- We will soon formally respond to the idea that economics just needs tweaking, or to resemble research more. Obviously this is simply not good enough, but it's an expected response. In the mean time, here's our response to critics:http://www.post-crasheconomics.com/a-response-to-commentary-on-the-post-crash-economics-society/Thanks! -PCES
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.