The key theoretical divide between Keynesiam and orhodoxy
The current conjuncture between keynesiam and orthodoxy characterised by
the dominance of international flow and the subordination of certain aspects of
domestic policy sovereignty
Seminar 2:
Deeper historical issues 1970s and 1980s
Demise of Bretton Woods and Rise of Policy orthodoxy
Contrasts to the modern consensus (represented by
Goodfriend) with a brauder and deeper approach
(Arrighi)
Section B
Aggregate Supply: Technology, capital and
socio-political factors in the Long Run
Seminar 3
The process of Long Run growth and
Economic development
Historical case study of USA catching up and forging ahead
patterns of uneven development in 19th and 20th century
Are countries best interests best served by embracing liberal
economic and political principles? If this is the case, is ‘uneven
development’ a matter of fate, exacerbated by bad policy. Or do
countries need to take their fates into their own hands and actively
adopt more ‘developmental policies’?
Seminar 4
Keynes I and Keynes II: ISLM and Beyond
Seminar 5
Keynesian Regulationist approach vs the New Consenus
Section C
Applications (Seminar 6-8)
Decade prior to the financial crisis, orthodox
macro presented itself as:
having achieved a new consensus regarding the most important issues
deserving at least some credit for what came to be called the
‘Great Moderation’ (see Goodfriend, 2007; Bernanke and
Mishkin, 1997).
Sense of achievement and
consensus emerged in developing
countries such as SA
Pursuit of low infaltion
Sem 6: renew the critique of the monetary consensus
Inflation targeting
Sem 7&8: Hetrodox extensions
Basis of keynes I and his writing in 1920s
Sem 7: Emerging literature on the
macro economics of the
developmental state
Sem 8:
Europe and constest the idea that
the Eurozon crisis reflects the failure
of social democracy