All Items
Permanent URI for this collection
Browse
Browsing All Items by Title
Now showing 1 - 20 of 648
Results Per Page
Sort Options
Item Open Access 2016 Capital as Power Essay Prize(2016) Muzio, Tim DiThe Review of Capital as Power (RECASP) announces an annual essay prize on the subject of capital as power. The best paper will receive a prize of $2000. A prize of $500 will be awarded to the second best contribution, while a $300 prize will be given to the third best article. Submitted articles should not have been published in a refereed journal or book before. The particular topic is open. The paper can be theoretical, historical or empirical, and it may support or critique the capital as power framework. Winning essays will be published (with revisions, if necessary) in the Review of Capital as Power. DEADLINE: January 31, 2017Item Open Access 2017 Capital as Power Essay Prize(2017) Muzio, Tim DiThe Review of Capital as Power (RECASP) announces an annual essay prize on the subject of capital as power. The best paper will receive a prize of $2000. A prize of $500 will be awarded to the second best contribution, while a $300 prize will be given to the third best article. Submitted articles should not have been published in a refereed journal or book before. The particular topic is open. The paper can be theoretical, historical or empirical, and it may support or cri-tique the capital as power framework. Winning essays will be pub-lished (with revisions, if necessary) in the Review of Capital as Power. DEADLINE: January 31, 2018Item Open Access 2018 Capital as Power Essay Prize(2018) Muzio, Tim DiThe Review of Capital as Power (RECASP) announces an annual essay prize on the subject of capital as power. The best paper will receive a prize of $1000. A prize of $500 will be awarded to the second best contribution, while a $300 prize will be given to the third best article. Submitted articles should not have been published in a refereed journal or book before. The particular topic is open. The paper can be theoretical, historical or empirical, and it may support or critique the capital as power framework. Winning essays will be published (with revisions, if necessary) in the Review of Capital as Power. DEADLINE: January 31, 2019Item Open Access 30 Years to the AIC. A Speech at Beit Sahur(2013) Bichler, ShimshonThe following is the text of a presentation delivered by Dr. Shimshon Bichler at the 30-year celebration of the Alternative Information Center (AIC), on October 5, 2013. Dr. Bichler is a political economist and veteran member of the AIC Board of Directors.Item Open Access A Brief History of the Buy-to-Build Indicator(2021) Fix, BlairLet’s talk about Nitzan and Bichler’s ‘buy-to-build’ indicator. If you’re not familiar, this is an indicator that quantifies the portion of ‘investment’ spent buying other corporations....Item Open Access A CasP Model of the Stock Market(2016) Bichler, Shimshon; Nitzan, JonathanMost explanations of stock market booms and busts are based on contrasting the underlying ‘fundamental’ logic of the economy with the exogenous, non-economic factors that presumably distort it. Our paper offers a radically different model, examining the stock market not from the mechanical viewpoint of a distorted economy, but from the dialectical perspective of capitalized power. The model demonstrates that (1) the valuation of equities represents capitalized power; (2) capitalized power is dialectically intertwined with systemic fear; and (3) systemic fear and capitalized power are mediated through strategic sabotage. This triangular model, we posit, can offer a basis for examining the asymptotes, or limits, of capitalized power and the ways in which these asymptotes relate to the historical and ongoing transformation of the capitalist mode of power.Item Open Access A CasP Model of the Stock Market(2016) Bichler, Shimshon; Nitzan, JonathanMost explanations of stock market booms and busts are based on contrasting the underlying 'fundamental' logic of the economy with the exogenous, non-economic factors that presumably distort it. Our paper offers a radically different model, examining the stock market not from the mechanical viewpoint of a distorted economy, but from the dialectical perspective of capitalized power. The model demonstrates that (1) the valuation of equities represents capitalized power; (2) capitalized power is dialectically intertwined with systemic fear; and (3) systemic fear and capitalized power are mediated through strategic sabotage. This triangular model, we posit, can offer a basis for examining the asymptotes, or limits, of capitalized power and the ways in which these asymptotes relate to the historical and ongoing transformation of the capitalist mode of power.Item Open Access A CasP Model of the Stock Market -- Video and Chartbook(2016) Bichler, Shimshon; Nitzan, JonathanMost explanations of stock market booms and busts are based on contrasting the underlying, ‘fundamental’ logic of the economy with the exogenous, non-economic factors that presumably distort it. Our paper offers a radically different model, examining the stock market not from the mechanical viewpoint of a distorted economy, but from the dialectical perspective of capitalized power. The model demonstrates that (1) the valuation of equities represents capitalized power; (2) capitalized power is dialectically intertwined with systemic fear; and (3) the connection between capitalized power and systemic fear is mediated by strategic sabotage. This triangular model, we posit, can offer a basis for examining the asymptotes, or limits, of capitalized power and the ways in which these asymptotes relate to the historical and ongoing transformation of the capitalist mode of power. Video duration: 1:53 hours WHERE: Room 280N in York Lanes, Keele Campus, York University WHEN: Thursday, September 29, 2016, 2:15-4:00 pmItem Open Access A Global Bond: Explaining the Safe-Haven Status of US Treasury Securities(2016) Hager, Sandy BrianThis article offers new theoretical and empirical insights to explain the resilience of US Treasury securities as the world’s premier safe or “risk-free” asset. The standard explanation of resilience emphasizes the relative safety of US Treasuries due to a shortage of safe assets in the global political economy. The analysis here goes beyond the standard explanation to highlight the importance of domestic politics in reinforcing the safe status of US Treasury securities. In particular, the research shows how a formidable “bond” of interests unites domestic and foreign owners of the public debt and works to sustain US power in global finance. Foreigners, who now own roughly half of the US public debt, have something to gain from their domestic counterparts. The top 1% of US households, which dominate domestic ownership of US Treasuries, has considerable political clout, thus alleviating foreign concerns about the creditworthiness of the US federal government. Domestic owners, in turn, benefit from the seemingly insatiable foreign appetite for US Treasury securities. In supplying the US federal government and US households with cheap credit, foreign investors in US Treasuries help to deflect challenges to the top 1% within the wealth and income hierarchy.Item Open Access A Hierarchy Model of Income Distribution(2018) Fix, BlairBased on worldly experience, most people would agree that firms are hierarchically organized, and that pay tends to increase as one moves up the hierarchy. But how this hierarchical structure affects income distribution has not been widely studied. To remedy this situation, this paper presents a new model of income distribution that explores the effects of social hierarchy. This ‘hierarchy model’ takes the limited available evidence on the structure of firm hierarchies and generalizes it to create a large-scale simulation of the hierarchical structure of the United States economy. Using this model, I conduct the first quantitative investigation of hierarchy’s effect on income distribution. I find that hierarchy plays a dominant role in shaping the tail of US income distribution. The model suggests that hierarchy is responsible for generating the power-law scaling of top incomes. Moreover, I find that hierarchy can be used to unify the study of personal and functional income distribution, as well as to understand historical trends in income inequality.Item Open Access A New Cosmology for Analyzing Capitalism and the Global Order. Review of Capital as Power: A Study of Order and Creorder(2019) Warren, BillFROM THE REVIEW: Capital as Power is a fascinating book because it dares to challenge conventional wisdom while offering a coherent and persuasive theory as a replacement. This is especially what I liked about this book. It's easy enough to criticize the world and say that things are terrible. That seems to be a favorite pastime for just about everybody nowadays. But it's far more difficult to offer a comprehensive alternative that plausibly explains, through engaging theoretical and empirical analysis, how much of the world works. That's what Nitzan and Bichler have done with this masterpiece. […] This is one of the greatest works in political economy to have come out in this century. I especially like that they analyze economics as a social construct rather than as an objective scientific discipline, which it most certainly is not. Having said that, I don't agree with Nitzan and Bichler on everything. For one, they have a basic causality problem: if all human history simply boils down to a power process, then what explains the power process itself? Where does that come from, what are its causal antecedents? You cannot really answer this question without stepping, one way or another, into the material realm of energy flows and conversions. In other words, you can't explain the causation of a social process by repeatedly invoking some other social process, because that leads to an infinite regress. Eventually there has to be something outside of human society that has a powerful impact on the evolution of society itself. There must be a series of bridges between the ecological realm and human civilization, but Nitzan and Bichler don't really bother with any of that. Their central theory, however persuasive, will always remain provisional and incomplete until a more comprehensive theory comes along that integrates changes in the natural world with changes in human societies.Item Open Access A Podcast Interview with Sandy Hager on Public Debt and Inequality(2016) Hager, Sandy Brian; Beasley, Betsy; Stein, DavidWho owns the U.S. public debt? Why is it such an important commodity in global capitalism? Why does public debt provoke such intense political debate? And how can the quantitative data on the ownership structure of public debt provide insights into these topics? Our guest today, Sandy Hager, reveals answers to all of these questions and more. Duration: 41 minutesItem Open Access A Portrait of Esther Alexander and Her Time (דיוקן לאסתר אלכסנדר ולתקופתה)(2005) Bichler, Shimshonאסתר אלכסנדר הייתה אחת הבודדות בישראל שניסתה להתמודד, ברצינות ובאופן מקורי, עם תופעת הסטגפלציה. היא עשתה זאת תוך שימוש מרבי בכלים המסורתיים של המתודה הקיינסיאנית, כשהיא משלבת זאת בגירסת ינקותה המרקסיסטית.Item Open Access A Power Theory of Personal Income Distribution - Video and Working Paper(2017) Fix, BlairDue in no small part to the work of Thomas Piketty, the empirical study of income inequality has flourished in the last decade. But this plethora of new data has not led to a corresponding theoretical revolution. Why? The problem, I believe, is an unwillingness to question and test the basic assumptions on which current theory rests. Most theories of personal income distribution are deeply wedded to the assumption that income is proportional to productivity. However, this approach has a simple, but little discussed problem: income is distributed far more unequally than documented differentials in human labor productivity. But if not productivity, then what explains income? I propose that income is explained most strongly by social power, as manifested by one’s rank in an institutional hierarchy. Using a novel array of evidence, I show (for the first time) that there is a strong quantitative relation between income and hierarchical power. Moreover, I show that hierarchical power affects income more strongly than any other factor. I conclude that this is evidence for a power theory of personal income distribution. Refreshment will be served and everyone is welcome. WHERE: Verney Room, South 674 Ross Building, Keele Campus, York University WHEN: 2:30 - 5:30 pm, Tuesday, 17 October 2017Item Open Access A Reading List for Economic Heretics(2019) Fix, BlairFROM THE REVIEW: Few books offer both a compelling critique of mainstream economics and a bold alternative vision for political economy. But in Capital as Power, Jonathan Nitzan and Shimshon Bichler have the audacity to do just that [...] Capital as Power represents everything that I look for in a paradigm-shifting work of science. It presents a compelling critique of existing orthodoxies, offers an alternative approach to political economy, and grounds this approach in innovative empirical research. Read Capital as Power and have your worldview forever changed.Item Open Access A Requiem for Carbon Capitalism?(2021) Hager, Sandy BrianThe fossil fuels business has fallen on hard times. For years the sector has been mired in a slump due to stubbornly low oil and gas prices, concerns over climate change, as well as technological breakthroughs in renewable energy technologies. With the Covid-19 pandemic dealing a further blow to their fortunes, some media pundits claim that fossil fuels companies are entering a phase of terminal decline. News of the immanent demise of companies responsible for a significant portion of global greenhouse gas emissions might sound like a boon for efforts to avert climate breakdown. But just how bad is the outlook for fossil fuels? In this research note, I offer a preview of findings from a new research project on the financial performance of the fossil fuels sector on a global scale. My research shows that the share of oil, gas and coal companies in global profit and capitalization has steadily decreased over the past half century, while that of alternative energy companies has jumped since 2018. But despite falling distributive shares, what we also find is that the overall magnitude of oil, gas and coal profit and capitalization currently dwarfs that of the alternative energy companies. All signs indicate that capitalists are still, as Tim Di Muzio observed a decade ago, capitalizing a future unsustainable.Item Open Access A Tour of the Jevons Paradox: How Energy Efficiency Backfires(2024) Fix, BlairWhen it comes to our sustainability problems, striving for greater resource efficiency seems like an obvious solution. For example, if you buy a new car that’s twice as efficient as your old one, it should cut your gasoline use in half. And if your new computer is four times more efficient than your last one, it should cut your computer’s electric bill fourfold. In short, boosting efficiency seems like a straightforward way to reduce your use of natural resources. And for you personally, efficiency gains may do exactly that. But collectively, efficiency seems to have the opposite effect As technology gets more efficient, we tend to consume more resources. This backfire effect is known as the ‘Jevons paradox’, and it occurs for a simple reason. At a social level, efficiency is not a tool for conservation; it’s a catalyst for technological sprawl.1 Here’s how it works. As technology gets more efficient, it cheapens the service that it provides. And when services get cheaper, we tend to use more of them. Hence, efficiency ends up catalyzing greater consumption. Take the evolution of computers as an example. The first computers were room-sized machines that gulped power while doing snail-paced calculations. In contrast, modern computers deliver about a trillion times more computation for the same energy input. Now, in principle, we could have taken this trillion-fold efficiency improvement and reduced our computational energy budget by the same amount. But we didn’t. Instead, we took these efficiency gains and invested them in technological sprawl. We took more efficient computer chips and put them in everything — phones, TVs, cars, fridges, light bulbs, toasters … not to mention data centers. So rather than spur conservation, more efficient computers catalyzed the consumption of more energy. In this regard, computers are not alone. As you’ll see, efficiency backfire seems to be the rule rather than the exception. Far from delivering a cure for our sustainability woes, efficiency gains appear to be a root driver of the over-consumption disease.Item Open Access Accumulating through Food Crisis? Farmers, Commodity Traders and the Distributional Politics of Financialization(2017) Baines, JosephThis paper considers the domestic and international ramifications of financialization and grain price instability in the US agri-food sector. It finds that during the recent period of high and volatile prices, the average income of large-scale farms reached the earnings threshold of the top percentile of US households, and agricultural commodity traders markedly outperformed other corporate groups. In contrast, small-scale farms, particularly those involved in cattle and wheat production, have struggled to manage the uncertainty brought by price tumult. The paper goes on to examine the role that these uneven distributional dynamics play in debates around how hedging and speculation should be defined and regulated in the wake of the food crisis of 2007–08. It shows that a coalition of small-scale farmers has actively pushed for a far-reaching definition of speculation and concomitantly wide-ranging curbs on what they deem to be speculative activity. Conversely, the major commodity traders and a plurality of organizations representing large-scale grain producers have called for a narrower interpretation of speculation which leaves the extant regulatory regime largely in place. With these insights, I suggest that financialization and associated price volatility tend to reinforce inequality in rural America while possibly exacerbating social instability and hardship abroad.Item Open Access Accumulation through Crisis: Global Stagflation and the New Wars(2008) Nitzan, JonathanA lecture on the capitalist hologram and the new patterns of mergers, stagflation and war. Video duration: 1 hour 45 minutes.Item Open Access Acumulación de capital: ficción y realidad(2015) Bichler, Shimshon; Nitzan, Jonathan¿Qué quieren decir los economistas cuando hablan de “acumulación de capital'? La respuesta es todo, menos clara. La opinión convencional es que hay dos tipos de capital: real y financiero, que deben guardar correspondencia y que, infortunadamente, la mayoría de las veces no se corresponden, pues el crecimiento del capital financiero tiende a desajustarse y a distorsionar la acumulación de capital real. El artículo muestra que esta “tesis del desajuste” y, por tanto, la capacidad de los economistas para explicar la acumulación, se construyó sobre bases deleznables. Argumenta que no pueden medir el capital real y que las proxies que elaboran con ese propósito los enreda en circularidades lógicas e imposibilidades empíricas.