Economic Collapse
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
An Economic Collapse is a system failure of an economy.
- Context:
- It can range from being a Sudden Economic Collapse (Pompeii collapse) to being a Slow Economic Collapse (e.g. Easter Island collapse).
- It can (sometimes) be triggered by a Social Shock, such as a Financial Crisis,
- Counter-Example(s):
- See: Unemployment, Great Depression, Hyperinflation, Civil Unrest.
References
2014
- (Wikipedia, 2014) ⇒ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/economic_collapse Retrieved:2014-11-2.
- There is no precise definition of an economic collapse. The term has been used to describe a broad range of bad economic conditions, ranging from a severe, prolonged depression with high bankruptcy rates and high unemployment (such as the Great Depression of the 1930s), to a breakdown in normal commerce caused by hyperinflation (such as in Weimar Germany in the 1920s), or even an economically caused sharp increase in the death rate and perhaps even a decline in population (such as in countries of the former USSR in the 1990s). [1]
Often economic collapse is accompanied by social chaos, civil unrest and sometimes a breakdown of law and order.
- There is no precise definition of an economic collapse. The term has been used to describe a broad range of bad economic conditions, ranging from a severe, prolonged depression with high bankruptcy rates and high unemployment (such as the Great Depression of the 1930s), to a breakdown in normal commerce caused by hyperinflation (such as in Weimar Germany in the 1920s), or even an economically caused sharp increase in the death rate and perhaps even a decline in population (such as in countries of the former USSR in the 1990s). [1]
2013
- (Graeber & Piketty, 2013) ⇒ David Graeber, and Thomas Piketty. (2013). “An Exchange on Capital, Debt, and the Future." Discussion at Ecole Normale Superieure moderated by Joseph Confavreux and Jade Lindgaard..
- QUOTE: I am not sure that we are on the eve of a collapse of the system, at least not from a purely economic viewpoint. A lot depends on political reactions and on the ability of the elites to persuade the rest of the population that the present situation is acceptable. If an effective apparatus of persuasion is in place, there is no reason why the system should not continue to exist as it is. I do not believe that strictly economic factors can precipitate its fall. Karl Marx thought that the falling rate of profit would inevitably bring about the fall of the capitalist system. In a sense, I am more pessimistic than Marx, because even given a stable rate of return on capital, say around 5 percent on average, and steady growth, wealth would continue to concentrate, and the rate of accumulation of inherited wealth would go on increasing. But, in itself, this does not mean an economic collapse will occur. My thesis is thus different from Marx’s, and also from David Graeber’s. An explosion of debt, especially American debt, is certainly happening, as we have all observed, but at the same time there is a vast increase in capital — an increase far greater than that of total debt. The creation of net wealth is thus positive, because capital growth surpasses even the increase in debt. I am not saying that this is necessarily a good thing. I am saying that there is no purely economic justification for claiming that this phenomenon entails the collapse of the system.