Donald Trump won in 2016 largely because enough voters in three states, all in the Rustbelt, which had voted for Barack Obama in both 2008 and 2012, switched their electoral votes from Democratic to Republican.

With the onset of an economic crisis that has been universally acknowledged since the end of March, two main questions arise: To what extent is the corona pandemic the starting point (or even the cause) of this crisis? And secondly: can the aid programmes that have been adopted prevent a deep and prolonged recession?

Mit dem seit Ende März allseits konstatierten Beginn einer Wirtschaftskrise stellen sich vorrangig zwei Fragen: Inwieweit ist die Corona-Pandemie der Ausgangspunkt (oder gar die Ursache) dieser Krise? Und zweitens: Kann mit den beschlossenen Hilfsprogrammen eine tiefgreifende, langanhaltende Rezession verhindert werden?

For some days, global financial markets are in turmoil. Central banks and governments are dealing with the unfolding crisis on a daily basis with seemingly u...

The Great Recession 2.0 is unfolding before our very eyes. It is still in its early phase. But dynamics have been set in motion that are not easily stopped, or even slowed. If the virus effect were resolved by early summer—as some politicians wishfully believe—the economic dynamics set in motion would still continue. The US and global economies have been seriously ‘wounded’ and will not recover easily or soon. Those who believe it will be a ‘V-shape’ recovery are deluding themselves. Economists among them should know better but are among the most confused. They only need to look at historical parallels to convince themselves otherwise.

In this short lecture the marxist economic geographer David Harvey explains how his theory of The accumulation of dispossession came about and its central principles The theory builds on Marx law of the centralisation of capital arguing how the accumulation no longer stems from producing rather through trading asset values …

Most mainstream neoclassical economists completely failed to anticipate the crisis which broke in 2007 and 2008. There is however a long tradition of economic analysis which emphasises how growth in a capitalist economy leads to an accumulation of tensions and results in periodic crises. This paper first reviews the work of Karl Marx who was one of the first writers to incorporate an analysis of periodic crisis in his analysis of capitalist accumulation. The paper then considers the approach of various subsequent Marxian writers, most of whom locate periodic cyclical crises within the framework of longer-term phases of capitalist development, the most recent of which is generally seen as having begun in the 1980s. The paper also looks at the analyses of Thorstein Veblen and Wesley Claire Mitchell, two US institutionalist economists who stressed the role of finance and its contribution to generating periodic crises, and the Italian Circuitist writers who stress the problematic challenge of ensuring that bank advances to productive enterprises can successfully be repaid.

Since the 1980s, the financial sector and its role have increased significantly. This development is often referred to as financialization. Authors working in the heterodox tradition have raised the question whether the changing role of finance manifests a new era in the history of capitalism. The present article first provides some general discussion on the term financialization and presents some stylized facts which highlight the rise of finance. Then, it proceeds by briefly reviewing the main arguments in the Marxian framework that proposedly lead to crisis. Next, two schools of thought in the Marxian tradition are reviewed which consider financialization as the latest stage of capitalism. They highlight the contradictions imposed by financialization that disrupt the growth process and also stress the fragilities imposed by the new growth regime. The two approaches introduced here are the Social Structure of Accumulation Theory and Monthly Review School. The subsequent part proceeds with the Post-Keynesian theory, first introducing potential destabilizing factors before discussing financialization and the finance-led growth regime. The last section provides a comparative summary. While the basic narrative in all approaches considered here is quite similar, major differences stem from the relationship between neoliberalism and financialization and, moreover, from the question of whether financialization can be considered cause or effect.

This paper presents an overview of different models which explain financial crises, with the aim of understanding economic developments during and possibly after the Great Recession. In the first part approaches based on efficient markets and rational expectations hypotheses are analyzed, which however do not give any explanation for the occurrence of financial crises and thus cannot suggest any remedies for the present situation. A broad range of theoretical approaches analyzing financial crises from a medium term perspective is then discussed. Within this group we focused on the insights of Marx, Schumpeter, Wicksell, Hayek, Fisher, Keynes, Minsky, and Kindleberger. Subsequently the contributions of the Regulation School, the approach of Social Structures of Accumulation and Post-Keynesian approach, which focus on long-term developments and regime shifts in capitalist development, are presented. International approaches to finance and financial crises are integrated into the analyses. We address the issue of relevance of all these theories for the present crisis and draw some policy implications. The paper has the aim to find out to which extent the different approaches are able to explain the Great Recession, what visions they develop about future development of capitalism and to which extent these different approaches can be synthesized.

How exactly are persisting social inequalities and the operations of modern finance connected? Adam Tooze provides a detailed answer to a still relevant problem by focusing on the Great Financial Crisis and the role of the finance industry in the USA.

The world is regularly shaken by crises some are bigger others are smaller in scope Local turmoil military conflicts commodity scarcity bank runs health threats the history of mankind can be written as a history of crises Three major global crises occurred in the last fifty years alone the oil …

Die großen Finanzinstitutionen sind ein wichtiger Motor für den ökologischen und ökonomischen Umbau. Aber was muss passieren, damit der Finanzmarkt diese Rolle auch einnimmt?

Neoliberalism is dead. Again. After the election of Trump and the victory of Brexit in 2016, many diagnosed the demise of the ideology of Margaret Thatcher, Ronald Reagan, Augusto Pinochet, and the WTO. Yet the philosophy of the free market and the strong state has an uncanny capacity to survive and even thrive in crisis.

In ihrer jüngsten Zuspitzung hat die Finanzkrise zu einer Sklerose politischer Entscheidungsprozesse, zu einer regelrechten Krise des Regierens geführt: Von den hektischen Verhandlungen über die Rettung von Lehman Brothers im September 2008 bis zu den Diktaten europäischer Krisenpolitik haben Expertenkomitees, improvisierte Gremien oder : roikas9 die Regierungsgeschäfte übernommen und wurden ausschließlich durch außerordentliche Ereignisse und Ausnahmefälle legitimiert.

Wege aus der Krise. Als die jüngste Weltwirtschaftskrise im Herbst 2008 ausbrach, stand der neoklassische Mainstream hilflos da, weil er keine Antwort auf eine Krise kennt.

In den Jahren seit 2007 stand die Welt vor einer Kernschmelze des Finanzsystems, die nur durch massive Rettungsaktionen der Politik zu Lasten des Steuerzahlers verhindert wurde.

It has become a contentious term in- and outside of economic policy: austerity. Allegedly the culprit behind the shortfalls of governments' reaction to the Great Financial Crisis, the policy makes for a spirited debate.

In this book, Blakely tells us a story of the class nature of capitalism, in which she centers the role of the financial sector and its rapid growth.

Seit Beginn der globalen Finanz- und Wirtschaftskrise 2007 steht auch die akademische Disziplin der Ökonomie in der Kritik. Dabei ist die Ökonomie nicht nur mit dem Vorwurf konfrontiert, man hätte die Entstehung der Krise sowie die ihr zugrunde liegenden mittel- bis langfristigen Entwicklungen nicht ausreichend beachtet und antizipiert.

Wealth inequality between Black and white people in the US barely has changed in the last 150 years. In her book "The Color of Money. Black Banks and the Racial Wealth Gap" Mehrsa Baradaran, analyzes why also Black banks have not successfully changed this and not enabled Black wealth on a broader scale.