Abstract
With the help of planes and solids, this paper presents an enlargement of the field of observation of economic theory. Through this transformation, the distribution of ownership rights to money and wealth assumes a central position in economic analysis. Thus social relevance is returned to economics. The validity of this operation is confirmed by the return of the millenarian field of economic justice to its traditional function as guidance to economic policy. The paper then presents four sets of economic rights and responsibilities that offer the potential of translating principles of economic justice into the complexities of the modern world.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Every step of the way in Concordian economics, decisions are taken following relentlessly the dictates of fundamental rules of logic. For instance, analysis reveals that since current definitions of saving and investment contain items that are productive (farmed land) and items that are nonproductive (fallow land) of further wealth, both saving and investment respect neither the principle of identity nor the principle of non-contradiction and therefore they cannot be equivalent to each other, as they ought to be for their relation of equality to be formally valid (see, e.g., Allen 1970: 748).
The separation of real wealth from monetary wealth is an integral part of the transformation of Keynes’ model into the series of mathematical models that provide structure to Concordian economics. This is a procedure that, outlined with the help of geometry (Gorga 2002: 32–37), starts with the enlargement of the definition of consumption from expenditure on consumer goods to spending in all its manifestations (ibid., 139–150), passes through the definition of money (ibid., 222) and the monetary formulation of the Flows Model (ibid., 309–312), and ends with the establishment of the equivalence of the processes of production, distribution, and consumption (ibid., 312–319). The description of these three processes and the economic process as a whole form the substance of Concordian economic theory (ibid., 159–234).
To fully appreciate the work of the Scholastics and the Doctors of the Church, we have to remember that “Life, liberty, and property” is the powerful formula that separates modern from ancient political philosophy. It was used by Locke to synthesize the great tradition that goes from Greek philosophers to the late Scholastics in which the concept of property—unlike modern economics—was fully integrated into a system of thought that incorporated all aspects of human knowledge, from theology and metaphysics to law and the physical sciences.
What to do with the widow, the orphan, and the handicapped is a moral issue. Economics does not do anything for them. Indeed, as proved by the history of the world, even in the richest of the communities at the height of the business cycle, economics cannot do anything for them. Their number can become so overwhelming, their needs so vast, that even charity becomes powerless. Economics cannot do anything for the widow, the orphan, and the handicapped – unless, of course, they own stocks and bonds. But then they are not poor; they do not need any assistance through morality. They are capitalists and by the virtue of being capitalists, by the virtue of owning the machines, they participate – through remote control of the machines – by right in the economic process.
References
Allen, R. G. D. (1970). Mathematical economic (2nd ed.). London: Macmillan.
Blinder, A. (1999). Quoted in “Students seek some reality amid the math of economics,” by Michael M. Weinstein, The New York Times, September 18, 1999, pp. A17, A19.
Brady, M. E. (1996). A comparison – Contrast of J.M. Keynes’ mathematical modeling approach in The General Theory with some of his General Theory interpreters, especially J.E. Meade. History of Economics Review, 25, 129–158.
Fanfani, A. (2003). Catholicism, protestantism, and capitalism. Norfolk, VA: IHS Press.
Ferrini, V. (2002) Gorga worthy of note. Gloucester Daily Times. December 11, A6.
Gewirth, A. (1985). Economic justice: Concepts and criteria. In K. Kipnis, & D. T. Meyers (Eds.), Economic justice: Private rights and public responsibilities. Totowa, N.J.: Rowman & Allanheld.
Gladwell, M. (2000). The tipping point: How little things can make a big difference. NY: Little, Brown & Company.
Gorga, C. (1959). A synthesis of the political thought of Louis D. Brandeis. Graduation Dissertation, University of Naples.
Gorga, C. (1964). Not simply a national fund, but a stabilization and development Fund. Mondo Economico, 19(14), 14–16.
Gorga, C. (1982). The revised Keynes’ model (an Abstract). Atlantic Economic Journal, 10(3), 52.
Gorga, C. (1991a). Bold new directions in politics and economics. The Human Economy Newsletter, 12(1), 3–6, 12.
Gorga, C. (1991b). The Dynamics of the Economic System, unpublished manuscript.
Gorga, C. (1994). Four economic rights: Social renewal through economic justice for all. Social Justice Review, 85(1–2), 3–6.
Gorga, C. (1999). Toward the definition of economic rights. Journal of Markets and Morality, 2(1), 88–101.
Gorga, C. (2002). The economic process: An instantaneous non-newtonian picture. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
Gorga, C. (2007). Economic justice. In Catholic social thought, social science, and social policy: An encyclopedia. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
Gorga, C., & Kurland, N. G. (1987). The productivity standard: A true golden standard. In D. M. Kurland (Ed.) Every worker an owner: A revolutionary free enterprise challenge to marxism. Washington, DC: Center for Economic and Social Justice.
Gorga, C., & Weeks, S. B. (1997). Fisheries renewal: A renewal of the soul of business. The Catholic Social Science Review, 2, 145–161.
Hayek, F. A. (1960). The constitution of liberty. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Keynes, J. M. (1936). The general theory of employment, interest, and money. NY: Harcourt.
Klein, L. R (1968 [1947]). The Keynesian Revolution (2nd ed.). New York: Macmillan.
Klein, L. R. (1970). The use of econometric models as a guide to economic policy. In Selected Readings in Econometrics. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Manicas, P. T. (2007). Endogenous growth theory: The most recent ‘revolution’ in economics. Post-autistic economics review, 41, 39–53.
Mankiw, N. G. (2006). The macroeconomist as scientist and engineer. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20, 29–46.
Nozick, R. (1974). Anarchy, state, and utopia. New York: Basic Books.
PAER (Post-autistic economics review) (2000–2008). Available at http://www.paecon.net/PAEReview/index.htm.
Rawls, J. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Schumpeter, J. A. (1936). The general theory of employment, interest and money. Journal of American Statistical Association, 31, 791–95.
Schumpeter, J. A. (1954). History of economic analysis. New York: Oxford University Press.
Thompson, J. M. T. (1986). Nonlinear dynamics and chaos, geometric methods for engineers and scientists. New York: Wiley.
Warsh, D. (2006). Knowledge and the wealth of nations: A story of economic discovery. New York: Norton.
Wood, D. (2002). Medieval economic thought. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Acknowledgments
This paper is uniquely due to several maieutic interventions, truly beyond the call of duty, by Dr. Wilfred Dolfsma. I also would like to acknowledge a clarification brought to this paper by Godfrey Dunkley. If this paper has become a cogent presentation less exposed to potential debilitating criticism of single points, it is due to innumerable constructive suggestions by two referees of Forum. Invaluable editorial assistance was also received from John Marangos. A more detailed background for this paper is contained in “The Economics of Jubilation”, a privately circulating monograph that has been well received by such a diverse audience as Dr. Michael E. Brady, Dr. John C. Rao, Professor William J. Baumol, and Professor Roger H. Gordon. That work, in turn, is based on a framework of analysis which was greatly assisted for 27 years by Professor Franco Modigliani and 21 years by Professor Meyer L. Burstein, among others.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gorga, C. Concordian Economics: Tools to Return Relevance to Economics. For Soc Econ 38, 53–69 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12143-008-9017-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12143-008-9017-6