The over­due Coper­ni­can Rev­o­lu­tion in Eco­nom­ics

Flattr this!

This is the talk I gave at the first con­fer­ence of the Inter­na­tional Stu­dent Ini­tia­tive for Plu­ral­ism in Eco­nom­ics, held in the beau­ti­ful Ger­man town of Tue­bin­gen, Ger­many on Sep­tem­ber 19–21 2014.

I cover Min­sky, money, com­plex­ity, the role of debt in aggre­gate demand & aggre­gate sup­ply, and the eco­nomic cri­sis. I spoke too fast and cov­ered top­ics at too high a level for many of the under­grad­u­ate stu­dents in the audi­ence who are part of the rebel­lion against the dom­i­nance of eco­nom­ics tuition and research by Neo­clas­si­cal eco­nom­ics. I hope putting it up here gives those stu­dents and oth­ers a chance to “hit the pause but­ton” and go through my talk more slowly.

Click here for the Pow­er­point slides (with embed­ded data and Min­sky files)

Keep Rus­sell Stan­dish on the Min­sky Project



Other Amount:



Your Email Address (and com­ment if you wish to add one) :


The students at ISIPE 2014
20140920_131353
20140920_131009

About Steve Keen

I am Professor of Economics and Head of Economics, History and Politics at Kingston University London, and a long time critic of conventional economic thought. As well as attacking mainstream thought in Debunking Economics, I am also developing an alternative dynamic approach to economic modelling. The key issue I am tackling here is the prospect for a debt-deflation on the back of the enormous private debts accumulated globally, and our very low rate of inflation.
Bookmark the permalink.
  • Steve Hum­mel

    Here’s some­thing I just cre­ated off the top of my head this AM

    The Seven Processes/Steps to Error and Ortho­doxy in Eco­nomic The­ory

    1) Don’t go to the actual begin­ning of the Eco­nomic process and
    2) don’t look at all of the data there and think about that data in ways rel­e­vant to Eco­nom­ics (or what­ever study your study­ing actu­ally)
    3) con­se­quently don’t per­ceive the data and the eco­nomic rela­tion­ships between those datums
    4) con­se­quently miss the actual causative data and rela­tion­ships (cause gen­er­ally pre­cedes effect in the tem­po­ral uni­verse I believe)
    5) con­se­quently one is only able to see eco­nomic effects
    6) because researchers are look­ing for causes but they can only see effects…they err and tend toward error.
    7) refuse/be unwill­ing to think in unortho­dox and/or inte­gra­tive ways of solv­ing the actual problem.…even when prompted to do so by those who ARE will­ing to do so.

  • Steve Hum­mel

    This thread after all is about revolutionary/evolutionary ideas and hope­fully poli­cies I believe.

  • Steve Hum­mel

    The cost account­ing sys­tem is sta­tis­ti­cal in nature. Does any­one here want to tell me when the cost account­ing, in other words the costing/pricing sys­tem, is NOT in effect on money actu­ally in or re-cir­cu­lat­ing through the econ­omy? And remem­ber, if a sys­tem and its effects are constant.….it IS a dynamic fac­tor.

  • Steve Hum­mel

    Tech­no­log­i­cal change gen­er­ally, and arti­fi­cial intel­li­gence specif­i­cally reduce aggre­gate demand? How could we embrace that fact and such change intelligently…and use it to make our own econ­omy more com­pet­i­tive, more domes­ti­cally self deter­mined and more productive…and still remain a profit mak­ing sys­tem?

  • TruthIs­ThereIs­NoTruth

    Bhak­sara, if Hum­mel lis­tend to those kind of com­ments he would not have got­ten as far as he has. His wis­dom is a bless­ing to the world and this blog is priv­i­leged to be an out­let for his sagely rants. In hon­our of that Steve Keen should rename this blog. My sug­ges­tion is some­thing like
    “Steve Hum­mel Anno­tated Wis­dom Occa­sion­ally Inter­rupted By Posts From Steve Keen”

  • Steve Hum­mel

    Ad hominem is not debate or con­fronta­tion of what I post.…and nei­ther is ignor­ing it.

    If cost account­ing is both a sta­tic and a dynamic reality…it needs to be fac­tored into the­o­ret­i­cal mod­els.

  • TruthIs­ThereIs­NoTruth

    yeah but here’s the thing — even if there is some ker­nel of truth or wis­dom to what you write — you mis­rep­re­sent it with a bunch of bor­ing rep­e­ti­tious self gra­tuitis rub­bish. Plus you’re not here to debate, I tried that, you’re here to preach to an imag­i­nary audi­ence.

    Exam­ple — Let’s say I was a con­spir­ing against the envi­ro­men­tal move­ment. I would place you as the main spokesman in favour of the move­ment to obfus­cate and devalue the envi­ro­men­tal mes­sage.

  • Steve Hum­mel

    But you’re right TITINT, I prob­a­bly should “take my act on the road” as a pub­lic speaker and on the inter­net in my own blog and show that both DSGE pun­dits (Mish Shed­lock) and Dis­e­qui­lib­rium the­o­rists (Steve Keen) are still crip­pled and blinded by ortho­doxy because they won’t go to the very start of the eco­nomic process and look at both the rel­e­vant sta­tis­ti­cal data and the dynamic force of cost which is never not in effect. It’s about time I started ben­e­fit­ing from all of the actual look­ing and learn­ing I’ve done for the last 7–8 years.

  • Steve Hum­mel

    How can you actu­ally claim to have tried to debate…when you’ve never looked at the data or the eco­nomic effects I’ve pointed at? Admit it you haven’t ACTUALLY done that. That is pre­cisely my point! You’ve come here and ad hominemed me in an attempt to unmock me…and the objec­tive judge would I think said that you have lost in that attempt.…most deci­sively because you never actu­ally addressed what I have said. Re-read the fol­low­ing:

    The Seven Processes/Steps to Error and Ortho­doxy in Eco­nomic The­ory
    1) Don’t go to the actual begin­ning of the Eco­nomic process and
    2) don’t look at all of the data there and think about that data in ways rel­e­vant to Eco­nom­ics (or what­ever study your study­ing actu­ally)
    3) con­se­quently don’t per­ceive the data and the eco­nomic rela­tion­ships between those datums
    4) con­se­quently miss the actual causative data and rela­tion­ships (cause gen­er­ally pre­cedes effect in the tem­po­ral uni­verse I believe)
    5) con­se­quently one is only able to see eco­nomic effects
    6) because researchers are look­ing for causes but they can only see effects…they err and tend toward error.
    7) refuse/be unwill­ing to think in unortho­dox and/or inte­gra­tive ways of solv­ing the actual problem.…even when prompted to do so by those who ARE will­ing to do so.

  • TruthIs­ThereIs­NoTruth

    When I tried to debate long time ago it was on a dif­fer­ent basis. 

    Look­ing at those points — how are you meant to debate some­thing like that — not wor­thy of debate. It’s all in your head mate.

  • Steve Hum­mel

    Well debate me on my claims that the cost­ing sys­tem is both a sta­tic and dynamic fac­tor in eco­nom­ics, and that it is in fact the most deeply embed­ded factor…and is being com­pletely missed and/or dis­missed by false ortho­doxy.

    The seven steps,…if that is what you are say­ing is all in my head, I’m sorry, they ARE an accu­rate assess­ment of what is done and not done by the­o­rists. They are also an accu­rate assess­ment of the process by which ortho­doxy blinds.

  • Steve Hum­mel

    Don’t believe me? Ask Dr. Keen if he thinks DSGE the­o­rists actu­ally look at and con­front what he says. Ask him if he thinks ortho­doxy blinds or not. Ask him if he thinks the ortho­dox are will­ing to con­sider unortho­dox, cre­ative and inte­grated ways of think­ing and pol­icy mech­a­nisms. In fact you and he should addi­tion­ally ask your­selves if you think that unortho­dox the­o­rists are per­haps still plagued by these ten­dency and are con­se­quently miss­ing rel­e­vant data and relationships.…still to this­day.

  • TruthIs­ThereIs­NoTruth

    ulti­mately i think you’re just a guy who doesn’t know bet­ter and on that basis i feel bad for you

    last piece of advice for what it’s worth, because im seri­ously ques­tion­ing why i still have a link to this web­site, enlight­ment = humil­ity — you are at the oppo­site end of that spec­trum

  • Steve Hum­mel

    Ha! Well, you are cer­tainly enti­tled to your long dis­tance psy­cho-ana­lyt­i­cal ad hominem opin­ions.

  • Bhaskara II

    Maybe I should have been more spe­cific and less direct.

    If you have been dis­sem­i­nat­ing pro­pa­ganda, and/or have been using pro­pa­ganda meth­ods for an extended period, please leave.

  • I’ve deleted Steve Hum­mel, and I’ll con­tinue delet­ing him if he tries to come back. He’s a crash­ing bore, and from what I can tell 90% of the comments–by those other than him–are now com­plain­ing about him.

    So he’s gone.

  • Bhaskara II

    Pro­fes­sor Keen,

    Thank you.

  • koonyeow

    Every­thing that Hum­mel began has ended.

    We are finally out of his Matrix.

  • Yes, I’m sorry I let the tedious bore dom­i­nate for so long: a com­bi­na­tion of my incli­na­tion to be open and too much work else­where. Any­way, he’s not com­ing back here–and if he does as an alias he’ll still be easy to spot!

  • Willy2

    Mr. Keen.

    Aus­tralia is get­ting hurt by falling coal prices.
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014–10-15/coal-price-crash-puts-communities-on-edge/5816954
    (Video included). A good sub­ject for a new post here ?

    You have pre­dicted this already in 2007/2008. “Aus­tralia has only one egg in its bas­ket and that called China”.