The financial crisis erupted in 2007 has generated among the public, feelings of deep aversion towards finance. Zingales (2015) in his American Finance Association presidential address, urges the economics profession not to underestimate these feelings. He remarks that economists tend to overestimate the benefits of finance, and to ignore that the ‘best form of finance’ is accompanied by a ‘bad type of finance’. The fundamental limitation of Zingales’s thesis is that it does not provide an explanation for the coexistence of these two forms of finance. The aim of this work is to highlight the limits of Zingales’s analysis and to present a sounder explanation of the distinction between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ finance, based on: i) Keynes’s distinction between ‘enterprise’ and ‘speculation’; ii) Schumpeter analysis of the role of bank money in a capitalist economy.

The financial crisis that erupted in 2007 has generated feelings of deep aversion towards finance among the public. Zingales (2015) urges the economics profession not to underestimate these feelings, noting that economists tend to overestimate the benefits of finance and to ignore that the ‘best form of finance’ is accompanied by a ‘bad type of finance’. The problem with these statements is that the macroeconomic theory elaborated over the last decades is unable to provide a satisfactory explanation for the coexistence of these two forms of finance. The aim of this work is to present a sound explanation of the distinction between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ finance, based on: i) Keynes’s distinction between ‘enterprise’ and ‘speculation’; ii) Schumpeter analysis of the role of bank money in a capitalist economy.

How much does finance benefit society?

Giancarlo Bertocco;Andrea Kalajzic
2018

Abstract

The financial crisis erupted in 2007 has generated among the public, feelings of deep aversion towards finance. Zingales (2015) in his American Finance Association presidential address, urges the economics profession not to underestimate these feelings. He remarks that economists tend to overestimate the benefits of finance, and to ignore that the ‘best form of finance’ is accompanied by a ‘bad type of finance’. The fundamental limitation of Zingales’s thesis is that it does not provide an explanation for the coexistence of these two forms of finance. The aim of this work is to highlight the limits of Zingales’s analysis and to present a sounder explanation of the distinction between ‘good’ and ‘bad’ finance, based on: i) Keynes’s distinction between ‘enterprise’ and ‘speculation’; ii) Schumpeter analysis of the role of bank money in a capitalist economy.
good finance, bad finance, enterpise, speculation.
Bertocco, Giancarlo; Kalajzic, Andrea
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11383/2076554
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 4
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 4
social impact