The origins of all economic activity lie in barter. Barter is the exchange of goods directly without the use of money as a medium of exchange. A barter economy is one that uses just barter to organise economic activity. Many subsistence economies will use barter as the main method of trading. We might be forgiven for thinking that, given the sophistication of a modern economy, barter is a long-dead medium of exchange. As the article below shows, we would be wrong. In fact, ironically, the very sophistication that has brought us this economic growth and technical development may also be bringing barter back into fashion. There is a wide range of web sites dedicated to swapping goods and services. Seedy People may not be a website you would immediately think of visiting, but in fact, it is an exchange for gardeners and allotmenteers to swap seeds. The author of the article (John-Paul Flintoff) may have failed to pay his council tax through bartering, but in these cash-strapped times, there may be lots of other opportunities to bypass the conventional market economy.
Money is dead – long live barter Times Online (11/1/09)
Questions
- Identify two weaknesses of organising economic ativity through barter.
- Explain why barter may be coming back into fashion.
- Identify the various functions of money.
- Discuss the implications for economic efficiency of more economic activity being organised through barter.
An ongoing debate in economics for many years has been the extent to which governments should intervene in the economy. The debate has re-emerged in recent months with the global financial crisis as many commentators have arged that had a tighter regulatory system been in place, it could have helped to prevent some of the poorer lending practices of banks internationally. Even the recent G20 meeting (dubbed Bretton Woods II by some analysts) discussed regulatory reform of the international financial system. The two articles below look at this debate about the extent of government intervention from two very different angles. The first is from the perspective of Victorian England and Little Dorritt, while the second (by Peter Mandelson) looks at how globalisation and the financial crisis have informed the debate about state intervention.
So much for ‘late’ capitalism Guardian (24/11/08)
The future active state Guardian (4/12/08)
Questions
- Examine the advantages and disadvantages of greater state intervention in an economy.
- Discuss the extent to which globalisation has changed the need for the amount of state intervention in an economy.
- “Strong social welfare systems and redistribution can be contributors to economic growth.” Discuss the extent to which this statement will always hold true.
The current financial crisis has led many to wonder whether this may mark the ‘death of capitalism’. While this may almost certainly be an over-statement, it may mark a fundamental sea change in the way in which we oversee and manage a capitalist system. The articles below look at some of the implication of this possible change in approach.
Positive thinking Guardian (18/10/08)
A category error Guardian (10/10/08)
History can guide, yet there are new limits of the possible Guardian (10/10/08)
I’ve watched the economy for 30 years. Now I’m truly scared Guardian (28/10/08)
The new New Dealers Guardian (26/9/08)
Europe and America in the shadows as a new era dawns Telegraph (26/10/08)
Questions
| 1. |
Explain what is meant by a capitalist system of economic organisation. |
| 2. |
Assess the extent to which a ‘soft-touch’ regulatory approach can be blamed for the current financial crisis. |
| 3. |
Discuss the extent to which greater levels of government intervention and economic regulation are likely to result from the current financial crisis. |
| 4. |
Are we witnessing the death of capitalism? |
A key introductory economic concept, brought to us from Adam Smith, is the invisible hand that manages the workings of the market economy. However, is the current financial crisis an indication that the invisible hand has failed us? Should we be looking more at the invisible heart of community when we try to build an economic system? The first article linked below look at whether we may be more successful at delivering economic happiness and welfare if we follow the invisible heart rather than the invisible hand.
This way happiness lies Guardian (19/10/08)
Why do we need economic growth? BBC Magazine (16/10/08)
Questions
| 1. |
Explain how the ‘invisible hand’ allocates economic resources in a market economy. |
| 2. |
Assess whether the current financial crisis may indicate that the invisible hand has failed to allocate resources appropriately. |
| 3. |
Discuss whether the pursuit of economic happiness may be more appropriate than the pursuit of economic growth. |
Hayek, through his book the ‘Road to Serfdom’ became one of the founding fathers of the market economic system that we have adopted as the principal method of organising economic activity. However, like all neo-liberal economists, his views and recommendations have come under increasing scrutiny in the current financial crisis.
Faith. Belief. Trust. This economic orthodoxy was built on superstition Guardian (6/10/08)
Dangers of worshipping false god of self-regulating markets Irishtimes.com (3/10/08)
Questions
| 1. |
Write a short paragraph setting out the key arguments in Hayek’s book ‘The Road to Serfdom’. |
| 2. |
Assess the importance of confidence in an economic system. To what extent is a lack of confidence a ‘self-fulfilling prophecy’? |
| 3. |
Discuss the extent to which Hayek’s work influenced the adoption of neo-liberal economic policies. |