Search

Financialization is a systemic transformation of capitalism that has occurred during the last four decades. This paper shows that the concept of financialization originates in Marxist theory, though its meaning remains unclear. It then proposes a theory of financialization as rooted in the altered behaviour of the fundamental agents of capitalist accumulation, including non-financial corporations, banks and workers. Finance has reshaped the activities of all three, also resulting in new forms of profit. It follows that opposing financialization is a complex process that involves creating public financial institutions but also re-establishing public provision for workers across a broad range of activities. Financialization cannot be reversed without re-establishing the command of the social and collective over the private and individual for the modern era. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Costas Lapavitsas considers the political economy of bloated finance and makes a case for establishing democratically-run public banks, which, he asserts, could strengthen the social and the collective in modern economies [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

According to mainstream economic theory the contractual relationship between borrower and lender is characterized by asymmetry of information regarding the project to be financed. It is assumed that trust among credit participants is constructed individually as they collect and assess requisite information. In contrast, this paper argues that trust and information among credit participants have compelling social constituents that depend on economic function and social context. More specifically, the paper shows that financial institutions transform trust into a social and objective relationship. The capitalist credit system comprises a set of institutions that construct trust socially by using increasingly general information. Nonetheless, the foundation of credit-related trust is the ability to repay money. Hence the moral content of credit is thin, giving rise to fraud and deception. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Examines the relations of power and trust as components of contemporary money and finance. Significant aspects of contemporary money and finance namely personal finance, independent central banking and world money; Economic and social power of money; Role of trust in credit transactions.

This article addresses the issue of how the market and the non-market are to be understood especially by concentrating on the theory of money. For mainstream economics, the market is simply an institution facilitating exchange, money being the key instrument for alleviating the inefficiencies of barter. In contrast, recent work in other social sciences, such as that by Zelizer, distinguishes among markets, and various roles of money, depending on cultural and social content. While being sympathetic to such an approach, we claim that the commodity is a better analytical starting point than the market. Based on Marx's work, we then show what commodities have in common and establish a common essence for money as generalized purchasing power. This is a peculiarly bland essence that allows money to undertake the variety of social roles identified by Zelizer. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This essay argues that appropriate underpinnings for radical analyses of credit and finance are provided by Marx's concept of interest-bearing (or loanable) capital, that is, money capital traded as a commodity and commanding the payment of interest. Related to this notion is Marx's characteristic view that the rate of interest and the rate of profit do not tend to equalization. Nevertheless, there is also considerable ambiguity in Marx's analysis of interest-bearing capital. The first derives the characteristics of interest-bearing capital from the relationship between a capitalist who possesses money and a capitalist who possesses an investment project. The second focuses on the generation of sums of money in the turnover of the total social capital, which are transformed into loanable capital by the credit system.

Presents a structural analysis of the theory of credit money. Connection between the forms of money and the functions it performs in capitalist exchange; Derivation and characteristics of credit money; Qualitative difference among different forms of money.