Ernest Raiklin

On the relativity of the concepts of needs, wants, scarcity and opportunity cost

Starts from the premiss that the concept of scarcity is the cornerstone of economics. Discusses concepts of needs and wants. Reviews some views on the differences between needs and wants, the reasons for these differences and their scarcity and opportunity cost.

The Disintegration of the Soviet Union

Attempts to discover an internal logic in the high‐speed events taking place in the former Soviet Union. In addressing the problems of the country′s disintegration, examines the issue in its socioeconomic, political and territorial‐administrative aspects. Analyses, for this purpose, the nature of Soviet society prior to Gorbachev′s reforms, its present transitional stage and its probable direction in the near future.

A Note on Misconceptions about Market and Non‐market Economies

The traditional analysis of the Soviet‐type economies denies the existence of markets to these economies. The usual argument is that these economies lack freedom and are characterized by the absence of private property. Additionally, the conventional analysis implies that theory of markets is a theory of free markets, one characterized by free economic interaction among economic units (individuals or businesses) regardless of the degree of market perfection. Argues that the conventional economic analysis is wrong in denying the existence of markets and capitalism to certain modern societies (e.g. the former Soviet bloc countries). The central thesis is that the environment in which buyers and sellers interact does not have to be free in the Western sense to be considered as a market. Points out that the economic systems of the former Soviet Union, China, Cuba and others may be characterized as totalitarian state capitalism.

On Some Aspects of the Soviet‐type Development

Attempts to find answers to such theoretical questions as the character of Soviet‐type societies and the major tendency of their development. Argues that, as long as the analysis is conducted in convenient and extreme terms of “either capitalism or socialism or communism”: as long as the yardstick for the comparison remains capitalism of laissez‐faire; and as long as the general trend and the particular forms of the world economic development are ignored ‐no satisfactory answer to the nature and fate of such societies can be found. If, however, one looks at Soviet‐type systems as socio‐economic and political structures destined to solve the problem of the industrial revolution and modernization of backward and peasant nations under the conditions of the twentieth century, then the enigma disappears. Soviet‐type societies become what they are in reality: a variety of capitalism that, having fulfilled the “archaic” act of industrialization, is moving into its post‐industrial era.

Reflections on Economic Aspects of Gorbachev's Book Perestroika: Wishful Thinking for a Make‐believe World?

Gorbachev′s book Perestroika is used to explain why the author believes the new policy of restructuring of the Soviet economy cannot and will not work. The policies of Perestroika are introduced and evaluated and the existing socio‐economic system presented. At the end of this sceptical Western analysis, it is concluded that the policy is cosmetic restructuring and Gorbachev′s downfall, like Khruschev′s, is assured.

Unemployment trends in Russia of the 1990s

The year of 1992 witnessed liberalization of the price system in Russia (Tseny v Rossiiskoi Federatsii, 1994, p. 5). As a result, all that was hidden and suppressed became open and free to move. This was especially true for unemployment in the country. Since 1992, Russia has experienced growing unemployment accompanied by a decline in the labor force and employment. Accordingly, the paper examines unemployment trends in Russia during the period of 1992‐1996 based on available official Russian statistics. The paper relies exclusively on Russian sources as the primary information on the transitional macroeconomic developments in the country.

Some Misconceptions about Market and Non‐market Economies

The traditional analysis of the Soviet‐type economies denies the existence of markets to these economies. The usual argument is that these economies lack freedom and are characterized by the absence of private property. Additionally, the conventional analysis implies that theory of markets is a theory of free markets, one characterized by free economic interaction among economic units (individuals or businesses) regardless of the degree of market perfection. Argues that the conventional economic analysis is wrong in denying the existence of markets and capitalism to certain modern societies (e.g. the former Soviet bloc countries). The central thesis is that the environment in which buyers and sellers interact does not have to be free in the Western sense to be considered as a market. Points out that the economic systems of the former Soviet Union, China, Cuba, and others, may be characterized to totalitarian state capitalism.

From a Ricardian to a Marxian Ranking of Economic Goals and Means (A Case of the Soviet Union)

Addresses two major problems. Argues first that the Stalinist model of socio‐economic development, with its actual emphasis on production for the sake of production, has been Ricardian in its nature. As a result, its dominant features have been the sellers′ market of shortages. Maintains, second, that the essence of the current transformation of the Stalinist system is its movement from the Ricardian to the modified Marxian model of capitalism. Since the latter′s proclaimed goal is production for the sake of profits, the “reformed” Soviet socio‐economic structure will have to end up as the buyers′ market of plenty.

On the Causality of Great Personalities and Great Events Exemplified by Lenin and the October Revolution

Was the October Revolution inevitable? If yes, what was its real character? If not, could it have been avoided or taken a different course? What was the role played in it by Lenin? Using the dialectical method of analysis, an attempt is made to provide answers to these questions. The following points are stressed: (1) Given the general and particular conditions of Russian life created by the First World War and the February Revolution, the break with the old democratic mixed capitalist form and the establishment of the new totalitarian state capitalist form of the social development were inevitable. (2) The fact that this process was headed by Lenin was accidental and, hence, avoidable. (3) But Lenin individualised the general and particular features of the October Revolution in terms of the names of the events associated with the revolution, of the time of its occurrence, of its participants and of their positions during and after the revolution.

The Extended Slutsky Equation Revisited

This article, making standard assumptions, tests the effect that cross price elasticity of demand has on consumer (directly) and producer (indirectly) behaviour. Two classes of utility functions are employed: one is U = X⊃nY⊃m, which is asymptotically convex and, hence, conventional; another is U = X⊃n + Y⊃m, which is nonasymptotically convex and, therefore, unconventional. As a result, the rationally intended consumer of the conventional function behaves irrationally, questioning the marginal base of the analysis of the firm. The irrationally contemplating consumer of the unconventional function acts rationally, upholding such marginal analysis. Thus, the validity of the direct relation between intentions and actions is doubted.