Ir para o menu de navegação principal Ir para o conteúdo principal Ir para o rodapé
##common.pageHeaderLogo.altText##

Artigos de Pesquisa

v. 9 (2021): Publicação Contínua

Empreendedorismo e Equilíbrio

DOI
https://doi.org/10.30800/mises.2021.v9.1395
Enviado
março 10, 2021
Publicado
2021-07-22

Resumo

A teoria econômica neoclássica considera o equilíbrio, seja geral ou parcial, como base fundamental da ciência sombria. Na visão dos economistas do mainstream, a estrutura do equilíbrio geral oferece, não apenas oferece uma análise da economia em termos de suas qualidades perfeitas, mas também é adequada como fim ou objetivo de ação. Em contraste, a Escola Austríaca considera o equilíbrio (ou a economia uniformemente circular - ERE) apenas como a direção para a qual as atividades econômicas tendem a se mover, porém nunca é atingido. Assim, a economia praxeológica concentra-se não no equilíbrio, mas no processo de mercado que leva a ele. Como o processo de transferir recursos para atender esses fins não pode ser atingido espontaneamente, o empreendedorismo tem um papel central. Na visão de Mises e Rothbard, o empreendedorismo envolve incerteza, indo além do estado de alerta enfatizado por Hayek e Kirzner. Por outro lado, diferentemente de
Lachmann, que analisa a economia como um caleidoscópio e rejeita a economia uniformemente circular, Mises e Rothbard a consideram uma ferramenta indispensável para entender a economia.

Referências

  1. Anderson, William, Walter E. Block, Thomas J. DiLorenzo, Ilana Mercer, Leon Snyman and Christopher Westley. 2001. “The Microsoft Corporation in Collision with Antitrust Law.” The Journal of Social, Political and Economic Studies 26, no.1: 287-302.
  2. Armentano, Dominick T. 1972. The Myths of Antitrust, New Rochelle, N.Y.: Arlington House.
  3. Armentano, Dominick T. 1982. Antitrust and Monopoly: Anatomy of a Policy Failure, New York: Wiley.
  4. Armentano, Dominick T. 1989. “Antitrust Reform: Predatory Practices and the Competitive Process.” Review of Austrian Economics 3:61-74.
  5. Armentano, Dominick T. 1999. Antitrust: The Case for Repeal. Revised 2nd ed., Auburn AL: Mises Institute
  6. Armstrong, Don. 1982. Competition vs. Monopoly. Vancouver: The Fraser Institute.
  7. Arrow, Kenneth J. and Gerard Debreu. 1954. “Existence of an Equilibrium for a Competitive Economy.” Econometrica 22(3): 265-290
  8. Barnett, William II, Walter E. Block and Michael Saliba. 2007. “Predatory pricing.” Corporate Ownership & Control 4(4), Continued – 3: 401-406.
  9. Barnett, William, Walter E. Block and Michael Saliba. 2005. "Perfect Competition: A Case of ‘Market-Failure’” Corporate Ownership & Control 2 (4): 70-75.
  10. Block, Walter and William Barnett. 2009. “Monopsony Theory.” American Review of Political Economy. 7(1/2): 67-109.
  11. Block, Walter E. 1977. "Austrian Monopoly Theory -- a Critique." The Journal of Libertarian Studies. I (4): 271-279.
  12. Block, Walter E. 1982. Amending the Combines Investigation Act, Vancouver: The Fraser Institute.
  13. Block, Walter E. 1994. "Total Repeal of Anti-trust Legislation: A Critique of Bork, Brozen and Posner.” Review of Austrian Economics 8(1): 35-70.
  14. Boettke, Peter J., Steven Horwitz and David L. Prychitko. 1986. “Beyond equilibrium economics: reflections on the uniqueness of the Austrian tradition.” Market Process, 4(2):6-25.
  15. Boudreaux, Donald J., and DiLorenzo, Thomas J. 1992. "The Protectionist Roots of Antitrust." Review of Austrian Economics 6(2): 81-96.
  16. Coats, A.W. 1969. “Is there a ‘structure of scientific revolutions’ in Economics?”, Kyklos 22(2): 289-296.
  17. Costea, Diana. 2003. “A Critique of Mises’s Theory of Monopoly Prices.” The Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics 6(3): 47-62.
  18. Cowen, Tyler and Richard Fink. 1985. “Inconsistent Equilibrium Constructs: The Evenly Rotating Economy of Mises and Rothbard.” the American Economic Review 75(4): 866-869.
  19. DiLorenzo, Thomas J. 1985. “The origins of antitrust: an interest-group perspective.” International Review of Law and Economics 5: 73-99.
  20. DiLorenzo, Thomas J. 1996. "The Myth of Natural Monopoly." Review of Austrian Economics 9(2): 43-58.
  21. DiLorenzo, Thomas J. 1999. “The Truth about Sherman.” November 8. https://mises.org/library/truth-about-sherman
  22. DiLorenzo, Thomas J. and Jack High. 1988. "Antitrust and Competition, Historically Considered." Economic Inquiry 26(1): 423-435.
  23. Garrison, Roger. 1991. “New Classical and Old Austrian Economics: Equilibrium Business Cycle Theory in Perspective.” Review of Austrian Economics 5(1): 91-103.
  24. Gunning J. Patrick. 2005. “Mises on the Evenly Rotating Economy.” the Review of Austrian Economics 3:123-135.
  25. Hahn, F.H. 1984. Equilibrium and Macroeconomics, Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
  26. Hayek F. A. 1949. Individualism and Economic Order, Routledge and Kegan paul.
  27. Henderson, David R. 2013. “The Robber Barons: Neither Robbers nor Barons.” The Library of Economics and Liberty. March 4. https://www.econlib.org/library/Columns/y2013/Hendersonbarons.html
  28. Hicks, J.R. 1939. Value and Capital: An inquiry into some fundamental principles of economic theory. Oxford: Clarendon.
  29. High, Jack. 1984-1985. "Bork's Paradox: Static vs. Dynamic Efficiency in Antitrust Analysis," Contemporary Policy Issues 3: 21-34.
  30. Hull, Gary, ed. 2005. The Abolition of Antitrust. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers
  31. Kaldor, Nicholas. 1972. “The Irrelevance of Equilibrium Economics.” the Economic Journal, 82: 1237-1255.
  32. Kirzner, Israel M. 1967. “Methodological Individualism, Market Equilibrium, and Market Process”, IL Politico 32(4): 787-799.
  33. Kirzner, Israel M. 1973. Competition and Entrepreneurship, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  34. Koppl, Roger. 1995. “The Walras Paradox”, Eastern Economic Journal 21(1): 43-55.
  35. Lachmann, Ludwig M. 1943. “The Role of Expectations in Economics as a Social Science”, Economica 10. No. 37:12-23.
  36. Lachmann, Ludwig M. 1994. “Carl Menger and the Incomplete Revolution of Subjectivism”, In Expectations and the Meaning of Institution, edited by Don Lavoied, 207-211. London: Roubledge.
  37. Lange, Oskar, R. 1938. “On the Economic Theory of Socialism”, in On the Economic Theory of Socialism, edited by Benjamin E. Lippincott, University of Minnesota press.
  38. Lawson, T. (2005). “The (confused) State of Equilibrium Analysis in Modern Economics: an explanation.” Journal of Post Keynesian Economics 27, no.3: 423-444.
  39. Lerner, Abba, 1937. “Statics and Dynamics in Socialist Economics”, the Economic Journal, 47, no.186: 253-270.
  40. Lucas, Robert. E, 1978. “Asset Prices in an Exchange Economy,” Econometrica 46: 1429-1445.
  41. Lucas, Robert.E., Jr., and E. C. Prescott. 1971. “Investment under uncertainty,” Econometrica 39: 659-681.
  42. Marshall, Alfred. 1920, Principles of Economcs, 8th edition, London: Macmillan.
  43. McChesney, Fred. 1991. "Antitrust and Regulation: Chicago's Contradictory Views," Cato Journal 10, no.3: 775-798.
  44. McGee, John S. 1958. "Predatory Price Cutting: The Standard Oil (New Jersey) Case," The Journal of Law and Economics 1:137-169.
  45. Mises, Ludwig von. [1922] 1981. Socialism: An Economic and Sociological Analysis. Translated by J. Kahane. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund.
  46. Mises, Ludwig von. 1949, Human Action. London. William Hodge. Reprinted 2008 by Mises Institute.
  47. North, Gary, “Tenured Austrian Economists vs. Murray Rothbard” https://www.garynorth.com/public/10768.cfm
  48. Rosenberg, A. 1992. Economics: Mathematical Politics or Science of Diminishing Returns, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  49. Rothbard, Murray N. 1995. “The Present State of Austrian Economics”. Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines 6, no. 1: 43-89.
  50. Rothbard, Murray N. (2004 [1962]). Man, Economy and State, Auburn AL: Ludwig von Mises Institute.
  51. Samuelson, Paul A. 1947. Foundations of Economic Analysis. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  52. Shugart II, William F. 1987. "Don't Revise the Clayton Act, Scrap It!" Cato Journal 6, no.3: 925-932.
  53. Smith, Jr., Fred L. 1983. "Why not Abolish Antitrust?" Regulation, Jan-Feb, 23. http://cei.org/op-eds-and-articles/why-not-abolish-antitrust
  54. Tan, K.2008 “The First Fundamental Theorem of Welfare Economics.” https://www.math.uchicago.edu/~may/VIGRE/VIGRE2008/REUPapers/Tan.pdf (unpublished)
  55. Tieben, Bert, 2012. The Concept of Equilibrium in Different Economic Traditions: A Historical Investigation. Massachusetts: Edward Elgar Pub.
  56. Tucker, Jeffrey. 1998A. “Controversy: Are Antitrust Laws Immoral?” Journal of Markets & Morality 1, no. 1: 75-82.
  57. Tucker, Jeffrey. 1998B. “Controversy: Are Antitrust Laws Immoral? A Response to Kenneth G. Elzinga.” Journal of Markets & Morality 1, no. 1: 90-94.
  58. Walras, Leon. 1954. Elements of Pure Economics, or the Theory of Social Wealth, American Economic Association.

Downloads

Não há dados estatísticos.