Schumpeter, 동태적 균형, 기업가정신/창조적 파괴, 과정

Schumpeter,  자연스럽게 찾게도 되는구나

일단 위키피디아에서 부분 따오고

Business cycles[edit]

Schumpeter's relationships with the ideas of other economists were quite complex in his most important contributions to economic analysis – the theory of business cycles and development. Following neither Walras nor Keynes, Schumpeter starts in The Theory of Economic Development[22] with a treatise of circular flow which, excluding any innovations and innovative activities, leads to a stationary state. The stationary state is, according to Schumpeter, described by Walrasian equilibrium. 

경제의 수리화, 왈라스의 정태적 균형

The hero of his story is the entrepreneur.

Proposed Economic WavesCycle/Wave NamePeriod

Kitchin inventory	3–5
Juglar fixed investment	7–11
Kuznets infrastructural investment	15–25
Kondratiev wave	45–60
Pork cycle
This box:  view talk edit

The entrepreneur disturbs this equilibrium and is the prime cause of economic development, which proceeds in cyclic fashion along several time scales. 

내 세울건 예쁜건 없지만, 기업가들의 영향, 그들의 노력/야망이 동태적 경제성장의 근원

한편, 이들을 적절히 통제할 틀도 있긴 할거고

In fashioning this theory connecting innovations, cycles, and development, Schumpeter kept alive the Russian Nikolai Kondratiev's ideas on 50-year cycles, Kondratiev waves.

Schumpeter suggested a model in which the four main cycles, Kondratiev (54 years), Kuznets (18 years), Juglar (9 years) and Kitchin (about 4 years) can be added together to form a composite waveform. Actually there was considerable professional rivalry between Schumpeter and Kuznets. The wave form suggested here did not include the Kuznets Cycle simply because Schumpeter did not recognize it as a valid cycle[clarification needed]. See "business cycle" for further information. A Kondratiev wave could consist of three lower degree Kuznets waves.[23] Each Kuznets wave could, itself, be made up of two Juglar waves. Similarly two (or three) Kitchin waves could form a higher degree Juglar wave. If each of these were in phase, more importantly if the downward arc of each was simultaneous so that the nadirof each was coincident it would explain disastrous slumps and consequent depressions. As far as the segmentation of the Kondratiev Wave, Schumpeter never proposed such a fixed model. He saw these cycles varying in time – although in a tight time frame by coincidence – and for each to serve a specific purpose.

Schumpeter and Keynesianism[edit]

Unlike Keynes, in Schumpeter's theory, Walrasian equilibrium is not adequate to capture the key mechanisms of economic development. Schumpeter also thought that the institution enabling the entrepreneur to purchase the resources needed to realize his or her vision was a well-developed capitalist financial system, including a whole range of institutions for granting credit. 

기업가와 은행의 연결, 최적화와 적절한 분배결과가 주어진다면 그게 태평성대이리라

One could divide economists among (1) those who emphasized "real" analysis and regarded money as merely a "veil" and (2) those who thought monetary institutions are important and money could be a separate driving force. Both Schumpeter and Keynes were among the latter.[citation needed]

금융현상이 요즘에는 너무 커져서 그런데

금융현상도 동일하게 영향력 있어야 되는 건 맞다. 과도해선 안되지만

Schumpeter and capitalism's demise[edit]

Schumpeter's most popular book in English is probably Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. This book opens with a treatment ofKarl Marx. While he is sympathetic to Marx's theory that capitalism will collapse and will be replaced by socialism, Schumpeter concludes that this will not come about in the way Marx predicted. While Marx predicted that capitalism would be overthrown by a proletarian violent revolution, which historically actually happened in the least capitalist economic countries, Schumpeter instead believed that the capitalist system would collapse as a result of an internal conflict that bolstered hostilities among itself. To describe it he borrowed the phrase "creative destruction", and made it famous by using it to describe a process in which the old ways of doing things are endogenously destroyed and replaced by new ways.

언제나 자멸은 내부에서 벌어지고, 다음 단계로

Schumpeter's theory is that the success of capitalism will lead to a form of corporatism and a fostering of values hostile to capitalism, especially among intellectuals. The intellectual and social climate needed to allow entrepreneurship to thrive will not exist in advanced capitalism; it will be replaced by "laborism" in some form. He points out that intellectuals, whose very profession relies on antagonism toward the capitalist structure, are automatically inclined to have a negative outlook toward it even while relying upon it for prestige. There will not be a revolution, but merely instead a trend in parliaments to elect social democratic parties of one stripe or another. He argued that the collapse of capitalism from within will come about if democratic majorities vote for restrictions upon entrepreneurship that will burden and destroy the capitalist structure. He also emphasized non-political, evolutionary processes in society where "liberal capitalism" was evolving because of the growth of workers' self-management, industrial democracy and regulatory institutions.[24]

Schumpeter emphasizes throughout this book that he is analyzing trends, not engaging in political advocacy. In his vision, the intellectual class will play an important role in capitalism's evolution. The term "intellectuals" denotes a class of persons in a position to develop critiques of societal matters for which they are not directly responsible and able to stand up for the interests of strata to which they themselves do not belong.

경제분야 엘리트들, 불가피하게 체제 반대적이기도 하지만, 체제로부터 먹을것, 쉴 시간은 부여받는다

One of the great advantages of capitalism, he argues, is that as compared with pre-capitalist periods, when education was a privilege of the few, more and more people acquire (higher) education. The availability of fulfilling work is, however, limited, and this lack, coupled with the experience of unemployment, produces discontent. The intellectual class is then able to organize protest and develop critical ideas.

시장경제의  순기능이 특히 교육분야에서 발휘될텐데

강남아줌마 식의 교육풍조는 그 역기능의 치명상이기도 하고,---

 

Schumpeter and democratic theory[edit]

In the same book, Schumpeter expounded a theory of democracy which sought to challenge what he called the "classical doctrine". He disputed the idea that democracy was a process by which the electorate identified the common good, and politicians carried this out for them. He argued this was unrealistic, and that people's ignorance and superficiality meant that in fact they were largely manipulated by politicians, who set the agenda. This made a 'rule by the people' concept both unlikely and undesirable. Instead he advocated a minimalist model, much influenced by Max Weber, whereby democracy is the mechanism for competition between leaders, much like a market structure. Although periodic votes by the general public legitimize governments and keep them accountable, the policy program is very much seen as their own and not that of the people, and the participatory role for individuals is usually severely limited.

우민정치, 일정한 한계는 불가피한 것 같다

주식시장에 나도는 그 수많은 이론들, 주장들도 불가피한 한계는 있을테고

목적없고, 영혼이 없는 그저 그런 내용들의 범람도 있을테고

Schumpeter and entrepreneurship[edit]

The research of entrepreneurship owes much to his contributions. He was probably the first scholar to develop theories in this field. His fundamental theories are often referred to as Mark I and Mark II. In the first, Schumpeter argued that the innovation and technological change of a nation come from the entrepreneurs, or wild spirits. He coined the word Unternehmergeist, German forentrepreneur-spirit. Mark II was developed when Schumpeter was a professor at Harvard. He asserted that the agents that drive innovation and the economy are large companies which have the resources and capital to invest in research and development. These arguments may be complementary today.