Credo

Economics as priesthood – a religion based on assumptions

Some of the ridiculous assumptions on which much of mainstream economics is constructed are explored in this chapter of Credo, by Brian Davey – for example the methodology that stresses individual decision-making, the assumption that decision-makers have the information that they need, the assumption of honesty, the default assumption of competition.

Entrepreneurship in the social and solidarity economy

In this chapter of Credo, Brian Davey describes how co-operatives employ more people than multinationals and provide services to 3 billion people weekly. They also tend to last longer than other forms of enterprise. While not perfect, their existence is a clear challenge to authoritarianism and they have been considered a dangerous threat by dictators over the past century.

Entrepreneurship – the narrative of creative destruction

In this chapter from Credo, Brian Davey argues that the role of the entrepreneur changes over time and that, at their most powerful, they seek to co-opt officials and politicians for their agendas. Management can be exercised through over centralised control freakery or via distributed decision-making systems. Many entrepreneurs and managers are psychopaths, and criminals are entrepreneurs too. In the modern world, control fraud i.e. looting your own company is not uncommon.

Georgist Macro-Economics and the Land Value Tax

Brian Davey argues in Credo that the ideas of Henry George are still very relevant for economic theory. A site value tax would help to stabilise property market cycles and promote greater spatial efficiency. However, while helpful, market mechanisms like a site value tax will not, on its own, fully resolve the environmental crisis.

Marginal productivity theory

This chapter of Credo, by Brian Davey, describes the “marginal revolution” of neoclassical economics. The idea of marginal productivity and payments to “factors of production” was developed for ideological reasons to counter thinkers like Marx and George. The theoretical framework learned by generations of students is contradicted by the evidence. The ideas of capital and land in neoclassical economics are incoherent.