|
|
This is a limited free preview of this book. Please buy full access.
Footnotes
1 Those wanting to learn more about Veblen after reading this book may want to see Tilman’s [2003] 3-volume collection of articles about Veblen, or his [1993] edited volume of Veblen’s own writing.
2 Neoclassical economics is the label that Veblen gave to the economic orthodoxy of his time, which had its roots in classical economics. The label stuck, and is widely used to this day. See Aspromourgos [1986], Fayazmanesh [2003] and Veblen [1919, 175].
3 See the essays by Hodder, Tilman and Stabile reprinted in Tilman, 2003, vol.III.
4 There is a strain of the “new institutional economics” that argues that institutions evolve toward efficient forms. Veblen would have rejected that viewpoint in the strongest possible terms. See Rutherford, 2001, 187.
5 Friedman and Friedman [1980, 11-13] used the same example to illustrate the power of markets.
6 See, for example, Mankiw, 2004, 405.
7 Keynes reached the same conclusion from a different premise. See Keynes [1964] 213.
8 At the time Veblen was writing, running a business was an overwhelmingly male occupation.
9 Note the similarity to Keynes. See McCormick, 1988.
10 See McCormick, 1986
11 A recent comic strip makes fun of the practice. It reads, “The board has learned that you’ve been dipping employees in varnish and using them as office furniture. We voted to fire you. Your severance package includes $100 million, the corporate jet, perpetual benefits and a salary of $1 million per year” [Dilbert, 2005].
12 For another approach to these issues, see Adams and McCormick [1992].
13 For Duesneberry’s relationship to Veblen, see McCormick, 1983.
14 In brief, low savings leads either to less investment or to a dependence on foreign capital.