Zer dela eta Minsky da garrantzitsua?

Galdera hori egin berri du Randall Wray-k, eta erantzuna emateko liburu eder bat plazaratu du: Why Minsky Matters: An Introduction to the Work of a Maverick Economist1

Wray Minsky-ren ikaslea zen eta berarekin burutu zuen bere doktorego tesia.

Hona hemen liburuaren zenbait zehaztasun.

(a) Liburuaren edukia:

Preface vii
Introduction 1
1 Overview of Minsky’s Main Contributions 21
2 Where Did We Go Wrong? Macroeconomics and the Road Not Taken 47
3 Minsky’s Early Contributions: The Financial Instability Hypothesis 71
4 Minsky’s Views on Money and Banking 87
5 Minsky’s Approach to Poverty and Unemployment 109
6 Minsky and the Global Financial Crisis 137
7 Minsky and Financial Reform 163
8 Conclusion: Reforms to Promote Stability, Democracy, Security, and Equality 193
Notes 223
Further Reading 253
The Collected Writings of Hyman P. Minsky 257
Index 269

(b) Liburuaren sarrera: http://press.princeton.edu/chapters/i10575.pdf

(c) Liburuari egindako iruzkin on bat:

Victoria Bateman-en Why Minsky Matters: An Introduction to the Work of a Maverick Economis

Halaber, irakur iruzkin horretan bertan Karen Shook-ek Randall Wray-z dioena.

Iruzkinak (6)

  • joseba

    Zer dela eta Minsky garrantzitsua den:



    “Although a handful of economists raised alarms as early as 2000, Minsky’s warnings began a half-century earlier, with writings that set out a compelling theory of financial instability. (…) Randall Wray shows that by understanding Minsky we will not only see the next crisis coming but we might be able to act quickly enough to prevent it.

    Minsky’s most important idea is that “stability is destabilizing”: to the degree that the economy achieves what looks to be robust and stable growth, it is setting up the conditions in which a crash becomes ever more likely.

    Minsky does a better job of explaining the global financial crisis–and why it isn’t over yet–than anyone else.”

  • joseba

    joseba, 2018/04/29 11:25 zera dio:

    What Caused The Global Financial Crisis?
    Professor L. Randall Wray, discussing the global financial crisis in broad strokes. The economist Hyman Minsky developed a theory of financial fragility and the long-run evolution of the economy, summarized briefly as “stability is destabilizing.” In the aftermath of the Great Depression, the worst banks had failed, the remaining ones were scarred by the memories of the disaster, and the government had put in place extensive regulation to ensure they behaved, and this variety of capitalism (what Minsky called “paternalistic capitalism”) proved very stable.

    But stability is destabilizing. As time wore on and memories faded, people changed their outlook and changed their behavior. Banks took on greater risk, and fringe financial institutions (which came to be known as shadow banks) put increased pressure on the traditional banks by taking on even bigger bets. Politicians came to view financial regulation as burdensome, and academic economic theory became so far removed from reality that the models used by the top economists at the central banks didn’t even allow for the possibility of a financial crisis.

    As a result of World War 2, government debt ballooned, and these safe government bonds served as private wealth which was leveraged in order to grow and keep full employment in the post-war era. But as fiscal policy tightened (the focus shifted from “full employment” to “balance the budget”), and real wages stagnated, further growth could only be accomplished by piling on private debt, which grew to astounding heights by the mid-2000s. These debts are liabilities for the borrowers, but assets for the holders, and so the huge increase in debt meant huge increases in financial wealth for the top 1%, and all this money needs to be managed, hence Minsky’s term “money-manager capitalism.” Important changes were also happening to the way financial institutions were operating. The mid-century bank business model consisted of issuing deposits (bank money) in order to finance purchase of mortgage notes from borrowers, which the bank would then hold and collect the interest income. But to evade regulations, compete with shadow banks, and avoid a potential adverse change in the interest rate, banks shifted to a new much more fragile business model. In the new model, banks would make loans with the intent to package them into securities and sell them as quickly as possible, and as a result, the bank didn’t care very much whether you could pay back the loan, and didn’t bother to find out (which is sort of the whole point of having banks). Other institutions would then issue short-term or even overnight debt to yet other financial institutions, in order to finance their purchase of these packages of mortgages. These mortgage-backed securities would then be carved into sections and sold to yet other financial institutions. As a result of all of this, debt between financial institutions rocketed upward.

    All of this private debt makes the system increasingly fragile, leading to what Minsky called “Ponzi finance.” If you are dependent on your income to be able to make your debt payments, then an unexpected fall in income could force you to default. If your creditors were counting on your debt payments to be able to make their own debt payments, then now they are forced to default as well. And so on. The result is a ripple of contagion, leading to bankruptcies, fire-sales of assets, and possibly bank runs. As financial institutions stop lending or even close down, normal business investment falls, and the result on Main Street is unemployment and people losing their homes.

    To get more detail on the causes of the crisis and the long-run evolution of the financial system, as well as suggestions for what to do about it, read Wray’s book on Minsky’s work, entitled “Why Minsky Matters”: https://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/why-…

    Bideoa: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M1smUezyFRM

  • joseba


    Derek Henry
    Tuesday, October 8, 2019
    The book Why Minsky matters by Wray completed the circle for me. I only got round to reading it last week during the last few days of my holiday. An excellent book, fantastic.
    The book completed what I have learned studying MMT. In the same way many Michael Hudson’s books have.
    What I enjoyed about it was the description between the 2 prominent mainstream theories. Keynes and Friedman and what both means when it comes to job creation and highlight where they both fail. Tied in with this piece by Bill beautifully.


    Derek Henry
    Tuesday, October 8, 2019
    Why Minsky matters should be taught in every secondary school. Then their is hope for all of us. Chapter 5 should be copied and pasted into Labour manifesto. Of course the SNP manifesto if Scotland ever gets independence.
    Unfortunately, neither would be able to implement chapter 5 as both want to be tied to the growth and stability pact, excessive debt procedure and the corrective arm. Finally they would both realise they are on the wrong side of the arguement.
    The Brexiverse, when the right act like the left and the left act like liberals.

Utzi erantzuna

Zure e-posta helbidea ez da argitaratuko. Beharrezko eremuak * markatuta daude