The 26th NISPAcee Annual Conference

Conference photos available

Conference photos available

In the conference participated 317 participants

Conference programme published

Almost 250 conference participants from 36 countries participated

Conference Report

The 28th NISPAcee Annual Conference cancelled

The 29th NISPAcee Annual Conference, Ljubljana, Slovenia, October 21 - October 23, 2021

The 2020 NISPAcee On-line Conference

The 30th NISPAcee Annual Conference, Bucharest, Romania, June 2 - June 4, 2022

An opportunity to learn from other researchers and other countries' experiences on certain topics.

G.A.C., Hungary, 25th Conference 2017, Kazan

Very well organised, excellent programme and fruitful discussions.

M.M.S., Slovakia, 25th Conference 2017, Kazan

The NISPAcee conference remains a very interesting conference.

M.D.V., Netherlands, 25th Conference 2017, Kazan

Thank you for the opportunity to be there, and for the work of the organisers.

D.Z., Hungary, 24th Conference 2016, Zagreb

Well organized, as always. Excellent conference topic and paper selection.

M.S., Serbia, 23rd Conference 2015, Georgia

Perfect conference. Well organised. Very informative.

M.deV., Netherlands, 22nd Conference 2014, Hungary

Excellent conference. Congratulations!

S. C., United States, 20th Conference 2012, Republic of Macedonia

Thanks for organising the pre-conference activity. I benefited significantly!

R. U., Uzbekistan, 19th Conference, Varna 2011

Each information I got, was received perfectly in time!

L. S., Latvia, 21st Conference 2013, Serbia

The Conference was very academically fruitful!

M. K., Republic of Macedonia, 20th Conference 2012, Republic of Macedonia

 :: Anonymous user Login / Register 

Optimised for Tablet | Smartphone

 Paper/Speech Details of Conference Program  

for the  20th NISPAcee Annual Conference
  Program Overview
General Session
Author(s)  Donald Fuller 
  American University of Armenia
Yerevan  Armenia
 
 
 Title  Capitalism: Discontent, partial remedies, lingering doubts
File   Paper files are available only for conference participants, please login first. 
Presenter  Donald Fuller
Abstract  
  
Emannuel Wallerstein has long predicted the collapse of capitalism. Has it arrived in 2011/2012? The thesis will explore the negative impacts linked to the global recession among the core countries of Europe and the Americas and its impact upon the peripheral or emerging markets.. It will compare the current recession/depression with that of the 1930s. Prognoses for recovery following 2008, have not been forthcoming. Have conditions changed? Is the recession confined to the finance economy only? Have the repeal of F. Roosevelt’s legislation rendered financial regulation powerless? Considering the demise of workers’ and households’ ability to survive financially, is a new paradigm necessary to rebalance the world economy?

Global economists do not agree regarding causation for the current recession. Intervening remedies have not created sufficient demand to balance large debt holdings and retarded growth performance. Time has not healed job prospects for unemployed seemingly trapped at a very low level of equilibrium. Neither the market nor government intervention appears to recapture market equilibrium. In most markets, prices are below costs of supply. Neither austerity in government budgets nor state stimulus packages designed to increase demand have rebalanced economies.

The thesis will explore three structural factors that seem linked to the current financial impasse: (1) the disconnecting of labor skills from current market demands; (2) income inequality is increasing; (3) banks and shadow banks are holding large cash reserves in expectation that governments will legislate populist measures against them as well as other investors. The current descriptive phrase is that the core economies are undergoing “Japanization” (alluding to Japan’s recession of over ten years).

The conventional wisdom regarding capitalism has been centered upon whether the markets have been thrown askew by governmental intervention (neo-conservatives preference for laissez-faire: free market) vs. the argument that market failures require government intervention to rebalance economies that are not entirely disconnected from political and social components of society. In democracies, both voters and special interests perennially disagree as to the causes of economic imbalances as well as the remedy. If, for example, societies wish to protect households and labor markets with government intervention, laissez faire may suffer.

The thesis will not resolve differences among neo-cons and liberals. It will, however search for structural changes particularly in core economies that can impact emerging markets. While it is tempting to believe that market problems are solely economic, not only animal spirits may be at work. The result has been to demoralize many middle classes of the world and lengthen the separation of rich from poor.