Lord Skidelsky Speaks at the LSE

This is an outstandingly clear presentation of Keynes', The Chicago School's, and Marx's economic perspectives placed in the context of today's British and American economies. This will be of great interest to the many amateur "economists" posting on ET. The question and answer period that follows is equally enlightening. This speech was given in 2010, but is just as applicable in 2013.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=q1YA-RG5qG0&feature=endscreen

 

Thanks piezoe.

I was going to ask you after I saw it was an hour and a half long, what are the biggest (very biggest) take-aways from the speech and Q & A. But that would be burdensome.

Rather, can you make a succinct statement as to the particular significance of the presentation for us on ET (obviously us with an interest in economics).

And what was the agenda of the presentation ?

Thanks again !

 

guy talking seems very liberal. -skip

 

deucy,there is so much of value and insight in Skidelsky's lecture at the London School of Economics that I simply can't do it justice with even an extensive summary. His talk was a masterful synthesis of twentieth century western hemisphere economics. Only someone with Skidelski's broad experience and deep knowledge of the history of economic thought could so clearly lay out the similarities and differences of the main schools of economic thinking that grew out of, followed, and now supersede the classical economics of Adam Smith. And too, his presentation is entertaining. Certainly worth an hour of anyone's time who has the least interest in economics. I would urge you to bookmark the link and go to it whenever you can spare the time. You won't regret it, I promise.

I'll simply mention a few things that pop up in his presentation to whet your appetite. Skidelsky says that in the 50's through the 70's we had Capital, Labor, and Government, but now we have only Capital. This is brilliant insight that I have never heard expressed so clearly. During the 1950's through the 1970's wages grew with productivity, but now we find productivity growing and wages stagnating, or even declining. In his talk he mentions and comments on Keynes, Friedman, Marx, Stiglitz, Krugman, Greenspan, and I think Volker too, I can't remember for sure. Oh, and Bernanke also. His contrasting of Keynes with the Chicago School is very interesting. (I never could figure out whether Friedman was joking when he said he was a Keynesian. Now, after listening to Skidelsky, I think I understand in what sense Friedman meant that.) Anyway please do listen to the full lecture. You won't be sorry.

 

Done your way ! I will.

Thanks for your response. It was of the nature I was looking for from you. Thank you for that effort. He appears from your response to be a text book wired for sound, albeit from one man's perspective.

I am not nearly so deep into the science as yourself or others. But I DO like it. More importantly, it gives me some refuge from political-speak so I can be my own judge of the BS'ers and demagogues. It also allows me to understand current events better as relates to money, finance, our national finance, and international finance, etc. which influences what I do for myself in response to it.

"...influences myself in response to it." That means within small, intermediate, and long time scales, each time frame has measures of potentially large and significant consequence to me personally. For instance, mixed with a decently accurate understanding of social and political dynamics (trends and current events), it can create imperatives to act with decisions that are life-style altering. Do I sell off my domestic real estate investments (including my residence !) and shift personal capital into an alternative/s. Do I invest more overseas than domestically ? DO I CONTINUE TO LIVE IN THE U.S. OR OVERSEAS ? Do I split my life half in the U.S. and half overseas ?

The right amount and right quality of information can be powerful as affects our personal lives. If all citizens of any nation that has the ability to elect leaders had this, arguably they would elect better leaders for themselves. The science of scarcity is at the heart of all of this.