The history of policymaking has been dominated by two rival assumptions about markets. Those who have advocated Keynesian-type policies have generally based their arguments on the claim that markets are imperfectly competitive. On the other hand laissez faire advocates have argued the opposite by claiming that in fact free market policies will eliminate "market imperfections" and reinvigorate perfect competition. The goal of this book is to enter into this important debate by raising critical questions about the nature of market competition in both the neoclassical and Kaleckian traditions By drawing on the insights of the classical political economists, Schumpeter, Hayek, the Oxford Economists' Research Group (OERG) and others, the authors in this book challenge this perfect versus imperfect competition dichotomy in both theoretical and empirical terms. There are important differences between the theoretical perspectives of several authors in the broad alternative theoretical tradition defined by this book; nevertheless, a unifying theme throughout this volume is that competition is conceptualized as a dynamic disequilibrium process rather than the static equilibrium state of conventional theory. For many of the authors the growth of the firm is consistent with a heightened degree of competitiveness, as the classical economists and Schumpeter emphasized, and not a lowered one as in the conventional 'monopoly capital' and imperfect competition perspectives. Contributions by Rania Antonopoulos, Serdal Bahce, Cyrus Bina, Scott Carter, Benan Eres, Jason Hecht, Jack High, William Lazonick, Andreis Lazzarini, Fred S. Lee, J. Stanley Metcalfe, Jamee Moudud, John Sarich, Anwar Shaikh, Persefoni Tsaliki, Lefteris Tsoulfidis, and John Weeks.

Over the last several decades, academic discourse on racial inequality has focused primarily on political and social issues with significantly less attention on the complex interplay between race and economics. African Americans in the U.S. Economy represents a contribution to recent scholarship that seeks to lessen this imbalance. This book builds upon, and significantly extends, the principles, terminology, and methods of standard economics and black political economy. Influenced by path-breaking studies presented in several scholarly economic journals, this volume is designed to provide a political-economic analysis of the past and present economic status of African Americans. The chapters in this volume represent the work of some of the nation's most distinguished scholars on the various topics presented. The individual chapters cover several well-defined areas, including black employment and unemployment, labor market discrimination, black entrepreneurship, racial economic inequality, urban revitalization, and black economic development. The book is written in a style free of the technical jargon that characterizes most economics textbooks. While the book is methodologically sophisticated, it is accessible to a wide range of students and the general public and will appeal to academicians and practitioners alike.

Over the last several decades, academic discourse on racial inequality has focused primarily on political and social issues with significantly less attention on the complex interplay between race and economics. African Americans in the U.S. Economy represents a contribution to recent scholarship that seeks to lessen this imbalance. This book builds upon, and significantly extends, the principles, terminology, and methods of standard economics and black political economy. Influenced by path-breaking studies presented in several scholarly economic journals, this volume is designed to provide a political-economic analysis of the past and present economic status of African Americans. The chapters in this volume represent the work of some of the nation's most distinguished scholars on the various topics presented. The individual chapters cover several well-defined areas, including black employment and unemployment, labor market discrimination, black entrepreneurship, racial economic inequality, urban revitalization, and black economic development. The book is written in a style free of the technical jargon that characterizes most economics textbooks. While the book is methodologically sophisticated, it is accessible to a wide range of students and the general public and will appeal to academicians and practitioners alike.

This study guide is designed to help students read and understand the text, African Americans in the U.S. Economy. Each Study Guide chapter contains the following pedagogical features: 1. Key Terms and Institutions 2. Key Names 3. True/False Questions 4. Multiple-Choice Questions 5. Essay Questions

THE JANUS-FACE OF RACE: REFLEC- TIONS ON ECONOMIC THEORY Patrick L. Mason and Rhonda Williams Many economists are willing to accept that race is a significant factor in US eco nomic and social affairs. Yet the professional literature displays a peculiar schizo phrenia when faced with the task of actually formulating what race means and how race works in our political economy. On the one hand, race matters when the dis cussion is focused on anti-social behavior, social choices, and undesired market outcomes. Inexplicably, African Americans are more likely to prefer welfare, lower labor force participation, and unemployment. On the other hand, race does not matter when the subject of discussion is economically productive or socially accept able activities and legal market choices (for example, wages and employment). This Janus-faced construction of race is maintained by economists' stubborn ad herence to the market power hypothesis. The market power hypothesis asserts that racial discrimination and market competition are inversely correlated. Discrimina tory behavior will persist only in those sectors of society where the competitive forces of the market are least operative. When applied to the labor market, the mar ket power hypothesis suggests that pre- and post-labor market decisions represent disjoint sets. On average, members of a disadvantaged social group may accumulate a lower amount of or a lower quality of productive attributes because of discrimina tion in marital, residential, or school choice, or because of substantial animosity in day-to-day interpersonal relations with members of a privileged group.

THE JANUS-FACE OF RACE: REFLEC- TIONS ON ECONOMIC THEORY Patrick L. Mason and Rhonda Williams Many economists are willing to accept that race is a significant factor in US eco nomic and social affairs. Yet the professional literature displays a peculiar schizo phrenia when faced with the task of actually formulating what race means and how race works in our political economy. On the one hand, race matters when the dis cussion is focused on anti-social behavior, social choices, and undesired market outcomes. Inexplicably, African Americans are more likely to prefer welfare, lower labor force participation, and unemployment. On the other hand, race does not matter when the subject of discussion is economically productive or socially accept able activities and legal market choices (for example, wages and employment). This Janus-faced construction of race is maintained by economists' stubborn ad herence to the market power hypothesis. The market power hypothesis asserts that racial discrimination and market competition are inversely correlated. Discrimina tory behavior will persist only in those sectors of society where the competitive forces of the market are least operative. When applied to the labor market, the mar ket power hypothesis suggests that pre- and post-labor market decisions represent disjoint sets. On average, members of a disadvantaged social group may accumulate a lower amount of or a lower quality of productive attributes because of discrimina tion in marital, residential, or school choice, or because of substantial animosity in day-to-day interpersonal relations with members of a privileged group."

The history of policymaking has been dominated by two rival assumptions about markets. Those who have advocated Keynesian-type policies have generally based their arguments on the claim that markets are imperfectly competitive. On the other hand laissez faire advocates have argued the opposite by claiming that in fact free market policies will eliminate "market imperfections" and reinvigorate perfect competition. The goal of this book is to enter into this important debate by raising critical questions about the nature of market competition in both the neoclassical and Kaleckian traditions By drawing on the insights of the classical political economists, Schumpeter, Hayek, the Oxford Economists' Research Group (OERG) and others, the authors in this book challenge this perfect versus imperfect competition dichotomy in both theoretical and empirical terms. There are important differences between the theoretical perspectives of several authors in the broad alternative theoretical tradition defined by this book; nevertheless, a unifying theme throughout this volume is that competition is conceptualized as a dynamic disequilibrium process rather than the static equilibrium state of conventional theory. For many of the authors the growth of the firm is consistent with a heightened degree of competitiveness, as the classical economists and Schumpeter emphasized, and not a lowered one as in the conventional 'monopoly capital' and imperfect competition perspectives. Contributions by Rania Antonopoulos, Serdal Bahce, Cyrus Bina, Scott Carter, Benan Eres, Jason Hecht, Jack High, William Lazonick, Andreis Lazzarini, Fred S. Lee, J. Stanley Metcalfe, Jamee Moudud, John Sarich, Anwar Shaikh, Persefoni Tsaliki, Lefteris Tsoulfidis, and John Weeks.