tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post495850957835164471..comments2024-03-28T17:08:15.784-07:00Comments on Social Democracy for the 21st Century: A Realist Alternative to the Modern Left: The Myth of Ludwig Erhard and Economic Policy in Germany in 1948Lord Keyneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-28275684664391081212012-12-23T06:26:45.484-08:002012-12-23T06:26:45.484-08:00Yes, the same phenomenon was seen in South Korea, ...Yes, the same phenomenon was seen in South Korea, Taiwan and Japan after 1945 - and was a key factor that led to their rise as industrial giants, though not by Marshall aid, but by means of allowing them access to US markets and technologies.Lord Keyneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06556863604205200159noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-55984062873886013692012-12-22T22:03:20.661-08:002012-12-22T22:03:20.661-08:00LK: Not related to this post, but if you are so in...LK: Not related to this post, but if you are so inclined, you might be able to contribute to <a href="http://increasingmu.wordpress.com/2012/12/22/bleg-for-progressives-which-micro-arguments-am-i-missing/" rel="nofollow">this</a>. I dunno if you have any criticisms of markets internal to marginalism fresh on your mind. Seems like a tricky thing.Hedlundnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-79325376201407500822012-12-21T20:25:22.481-08:002012-12-21T20:25:22.481-08:00"I wonder how much economic aid East Germany ..."I wonder how much economic aid East Germany received from the USSR?"<br /><br />I'll satisfy your curiosity. In fact, the USSR exacted punitive war reparations from East Germany. This included payments for years after the war, but another aspect was Soviet seizure and removal of industrial infrastructure. So, yes, perfect testing conditions. Willhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14943136764424893492noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-33442000855373127102012-12-21T09:16:19.197-08:002012-12-21T09:16:19.197-08:00"The mixed economies in the capitalist West –..."The mixed economies in the capitalist West – even those with some nationalised industries – were hardly “planned economies,” for that phrase, if it is to have any meaning, must refer to communist command economies."<br /><br />I wouldn't be as confident on that front. There was substantial planning going on in, for example, France in the post-war era:<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirigisme#Dirigisme_in_France<br /><br />I think that its pretty fair to call his economic planning. No, its not a command economy, but it is quite self-consciously planning.<br /><br />But yes, that documentary does appear to be naked propaganda. I like when Friedman says that "wage and price controls never control inflation", as if they hadn't worked remarkably during the war era for all countries and during the Hitler rearmament era prior to war:<br /><br />http://www.ihr.org/other/economyhitler2011.html<br /><br />Philip Pilkingtonhttp://www.nakedcapitalism.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-23854455794649762762012-12-21T03:40:02.201-08:002012-12-21T03:40:02.201-08:00Marshall Plan meant that for geopolitical reasons ...Marshall Plan meant that for geopolitical reasons the US lifted West German BOP constraint. This is a typical case of what Serrano and Medeiros call "development by invitation."Matias Vernengohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09521604894748538215noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-48199702971800601072012-12-20T22:23:46.058-08:002012-12-20T22:23:46.058-08:00Right. And without the Korean war boom Germany cou...Right. And without the Korean war boom Germany could hardly recover from the early 1950s balance of payment crisis (that led her to borrow from her European partners! and later Germany benefited of the debt restructuring that Syriza is now asking for Greece)<br />The policy pursued by Germany since the early 1950's has been described by a leading German economic historian as "monetary mercantilism": let the others to be keynesian, take advantage of fixed exchange rates, control wages and domestic demand through an "independent" central bank. Erhard was behind this. I do not speak German, unfortunately, but I tried to sum up what I undestood in this regard in this paper that appeared in the Int J of Pol Ec http://www.econ-pol.unisi.it/dipartimento/it/node/1267Sergio Cesarattohttp://www.econ-pol.unisi.it/cesaratto/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-16958772059793858312012-12-20T22:07:33.060-08:002012-12-20T22:07:33.060-08:00The nice thing about freedom and free markets is t...The nice thing about freedom and free markets is that it takes just a little to make a big difference to the wealth of the population. Given all the controls of a German society just a tiny loosening allowed a country living in the Stone Age to recover. I wonder how much economic aid East Germany received from the USSR? Seems like there was also some dismantling of factories going on at the time US aid was coming in. I'm sure foreign aid was as effective in West Germany as it is today in so many developing nations receiving it. I guess West Germany was really no better-off than East Germany except for all the foreign aid and price controls. It really is hard to tell what made a difference in the two economies? Anthony Limahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15923530382897881718noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6245381193993153721.post-90482018724039142662012-12-20T18:26:47.041-08:002012-12-20T18:26:47.041-08:00The Commanding Heights is propaganda of the worst ...The Commanding Heights is propaganda of the worst kind: it has the appearance of honesty. But it's distortions are too many to count. The feature that irritated me most is the unstated assumption that there is no difference between Keynesian macroeconomic policy and Marxist central planning.<br /><br />The statement from some Bush White House loser that Carter was "the most Keynesian" president is also infuriating. The seven presidents who preceded Carter were all much more Keynesian than he was!Willhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14943136764424893492noreply@blogger.com