Re: how does economics explain stagflation?


"Robert Vienneau" <rvien@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:rvien-1C95E9.04484920042005@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> In article <kbWdnZ6lbq16MfjfRVn-iw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "anon"
> <me@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> (now that it is almost upon us.)
>
> You might think this is a good forum to an answer from an academic
> economist to your question. It is not. There used to be more academics
> posting here. But when they were shown that neoclassical economics
> is mistaken, the mainstream academic economists abandoned this
> forum in a cowardly retreat.
>
> "We must now consider another type of limit upon the rate of
> accumulation. Inflationary pressure, bring financial checks
> into operation, may arise when there is no scarcity of labour -
> indeed a great mass of non-employment - if the real-wage rate
> refuses to be depressed below a particular level. A higher
> rate of accumulation means a lower real-wage rate. When the
> desired rate of accumulation is greater than the rate which is
> associated with the minimum acceptable real wage, the desire
> must be checked. A situation in which the rate of accumulation
> is being held in check by the threat of rising money wages
> due to a rise in prices (as opposed to rising money wages due
> to a scarcity of labour) may be described as a *** golden
> age.
>
most economists tie inflation to wages.

but labour is just another factor of production.

why don't they consider land prices for example as other source of
inflation?
evidence suggests inflation first hits land price before it reaches wages.


.

Quantcast