Economics

The Value of Everything: Making and Taking in the Global Economy

The Value of Everything: Making and Taking in the Global Economy

  • Downloads：8714
  • Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
  • Create Date：2021-05-05 11:58:09
  • Update Date：2025-09-06
  • Status：finish
  • Author：Mariana Mazzucato
  • ISBN：0141980761
  • Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
  • Download

Summary

WINNER OF THE 2019 MADAME DE STAËL PRIZE AND THE 2018 LEONTIEF PRIZE FOR ADVANCING THE FRONTIERS OF ECONOMIC THOUGHT

SHORTLISTED FOR THE FT & MCKINSEY BUSINESS BOOK OF THE YEAR 2018

Who really creates wealth in our world？ And how do we decide the value of what they do？ At the heart of today's financial and economic crisis is a problem hiding in plain sight。

In modern capitalism， value-extraction is rewarded more highly than value-creation: the productive process that drives a healthy economy and society。 From companies driven solely to maximize shareholder value to astronomically high prices of medicines justified through big pharma's 'value pricing'， we misidentify taking with making， and have lost sight of what value really means。 Once a central plank of economic thought， this concept of value - what it is， why it matters to us - is simply no longer discussed。

Yet， argues Mariana Mazzucato in this penetrating and passionate new book， if we are to reform capitalism - radically to transform an increasingly sick system rather than continue feeding it - we urgently need to rethink where wealth comes from。 Which activities create it， which extract it， which destroy it？ Answers to these questions are key if we want to replace the current parasitic system with a type of capitalism that is more sustainable， more symbiotic - that works for us all。 The Value of Everything reigniteS a long-needed debate about the kind of world we really want to live in。

Download

Reviews

Charlotta Liukas ，

Thought-provoking book on value creation - how， by whom and where value is created。 It’s not hyper technical but still being untrained in economics， I would have preferred reading it instead of listening to the audiobook。 At parts challenging to follow the fast moving analysis on audio。

Femke ，

Not gonna lie， a lot of it went waaay over my head because it’s a very dry and though read when you know little about economics。 It seems like the concept of “value” is quite subjective and has changed throughout history from meaning “the things that we as human beings need to survive” like， food， shelter， warmth etc to “whatever can make （a lot of） money” and that now the private sector， the big businesses are seen as way more productive and valuable than the public sector， governments， health Not gonna lie， a lot of it went waaay over my head because it’s a very dry and though read when you know little about economics。 It seems like the concept of “value” is quite subjective and has changed throughout history from meaning “the things that we as human beings need to survive” like， food， shelter， warmth etc to “whatever can make （a lot of） money” and that now the private sector， the big businesses are seen as way more productive and valuable than the public sector， governments， health care， infrastructure etc。 Money has become such a big deal that no wonder people look up to entrepreneurs， people working in Silicon Valley and owners and employees of big companies like Amazon and Apple。 I like the comparison the author makes between trying to get to space and trying to save planet earth。 Both are very hard to achieve and in both cases people and companies from all sorts of fields need to work together to actually make it work， but right now we’re doing a way better job at reaching Mars then saving our own planet。 Which should make us rethink about what is really valuable; that what could make the most money or that what can make a healthier and happier world for everyone， not just the 61 richest people on earth。 。。。more

Clayton ，

Great re-think of what "value" and "productive" mean in the context of our modern economy。 It seems more and more people today are starting to question if how our economy approaches the private-public relationship is doing the greatest good for society and the planet。 This book is a good place to start。 Rather than demonizing the public sector as a drain on growth and profits， we should recognize how government spending in infrastructure， education， and research has created value from which we a Great re-think of what "value" and "productive" mean in the context of our modern economy。 It seems more and more people today are starting to question if how our economy approaches the private-public relationship is doing the greatest good for society and the planet。 This book is a good place to start。 Rather than demonizing the public sector as a drain on growth and profits， we should recognize how government spending in infrastructure， education， and research has created value from which we all benfit。 And moreover how the private sector has benefited from public spending and should do more to reinvest their profits back into society as opposed to diverting profits to executives and shareholders。 The private sector needs to become less obsessed with shareholder supremacy and more focused on stakeholder supremacy。 My other key insight is how Adam Smith， the "invisible hand，" and "laissez faire" have been divorced from their original contexts and uses。 。。。more

Tim Prindall ，

What a phenomenal and thought provoking read。 Right off the bat your understanding of Value Theory and the fathers of modern economics will be tested。 I highly recommend anyone interested in the ever-going debate on how our economy should function read this title， or really any of Mazzucaro’s work。

Jonida ，

Quite dense， but really good。 I've also seen her talk and the arguments she presents are nothing like I've come across before; I left feeling optimistic and better informed on how govts have and should contribute to value creation。 Quite dense， but really good。 I've also seen her talk and the arguments she presents are nothing like I've come across before; I left feeling optimistic and better informed on how govts have and should contribute to value creation。 。。。more

Sush Azad ，

If you already believe， or are open to believing in the fundamental idea of this book - that the inherent value of an object/service should be based the resources （physical/time/labour/skill） it took to make/deliver it， and not just a function of "what are people willing to pay for it？"， then this is a great book that shows why an economy built around this updated definition of value is more equitable society where innovation thrives。 If aren't open to this idea before you start reading， then yo If you already believe， or are open to believing in the fundamental idea of this book - that the inherent value of an object/service should be based the resources （physical/time/labour/skill） it took to make/deliver it， and not just a function of "what are people willing to pay for it？"， then this is a great book that shows why an economy built around this updated definition of value is more equitable society where innovation thrives。 If aren't open to this idea before you start reading， then you're not going to find your convictions being turned around by this book。 。。。more

Don Cheadle ，

I first encountered Mariana Mazzucato's ideas as a paper in a course on Innovation and Technology Management at my university。 If I recall correctly， the paper had been buried in the further readings， meaning that I only read it after wrapping up for the year and having written an essay on funding gaps in biotechnology。 I really only started reading it on a whim， but I am very glad that I did。Mariana dazzled me by citing the obscure readings like Pisano 2006 as case studies of the overarching th I first encountered Mariana Mazzucato's ideas as a paper in a course on Innovation and Technology Management at my university。 If I recall correctly， the paper had been buried in the further readings， meaning that I only read it after wrapping up for the year and having written an essay on funding gaps in biotechnology。 I really only started reading it on a whim， but I am very glad that I did。Mariana dazzled me by citing the obscure readings like Pisano 2006 as case studies of the overarching theory challenging invidulistic entrepreneurship in favour of socio-systemic outcomes。 But it wasn't just her awareness and expertise in various different sectors that impressed me - it was how she wielded the information to make her case， and her ability to synthesize various theories to create a meaningful critique of how our current economics works that decidedly won me over。Having read the book， I am concluding that there is something wickedly wrong with how economics is taught， even at ostensibly prestigious institutions like the one I attend。 And unfortunately， behavioural economics， a popularly prescribed fix， is merely a band-aid that will do little to help us get out of this mess。Fortunately， Mariana is not only good at critiquing but also at formulating solutions。 These are exciting times for economics， and in no small part have they been reinvigorated by this little book。 。。。more

Freddy ，

It certainly is an informative book with lots of history on different economic models and the notion of ‘value’。 However， I have found it to be very dry and technical。 Had to put it away after 80 pages as it was like reading a never ending text book。

Eleri ，

Well this was veeeery dense。 Interesting， but too much effort for me to be able to get much positive enjoyment out of reading it。 One of those books that confirms and justifies some vague， half-formed notions in your head， especially about what exactly the financial sector is actually contributing to the economy & society in general （spoiler: not much）。 All centred around an argument that we should be putting the concept of 'value' back into the way we approach economics - I thought the section Well this was veeeery dense。 Interesting， but too much effort for me to be able to get much positive enjoyment out of reading it。 One of those books that confirms and justifies some vague， half-formed notions in your head， especially about what exactly the financial sector is actually contributing to the economy & society in general （spoiler: not much）。 All centred around an argument that we should be putting the concept of 'value' back into the way we approach economics - I thought the section on 'public value' was particularly interesting。 The discussion is mostly around the UK and the US， but there were some interesting comparisons between the two - I think Mazzucato is American but has been based in the UK for a while now so is fairly well-placed to make those in-depth comparisons。 。。。more

Sophie Pesek ，

Say it with me: price does not equal value。 A terrific post-Keynesian thinker， Mazzucato describes how modern perceptions of the government as a lumbering referee are inaccurate and short-sighted—how instead， the government can be thought of as a long-term investor that focuses on cutting edge research。 However， the government’s contribution is often forgotten and that same research pays dividends into entrepreneurs’ and VC’s pockets。 I love how this book offers actionable suggestions about refr Say it with me: price does not equal value。 A terrific post-Keynesian thinker， Mazzucato describes how modern perceptions of the government as a lumbering referee are inaccurate and short-sighted—how instead， the government can be thought of as a long-term investor that focuses on cutting edge research。 However， the government’s contribution is often forgotten and that same research pays dividends into entrepreneurs’ and VC’s pockets。 I love how this book offers actionable suggestions about reframing prices around what society actually values。 A must-read for anyone who always wonders why financiers get paid more than teachers。 。。。more

Taavi Mandel ，

Discusses when the concepts of value creation and value extraction can be mistaken for oneanother and proposes that government activities are not merely costs but rather do create value。Highlights that governments to not reap the deserved benefits of their contributions， as compensation for their risk-taking on the taxpayers' behalf is too often extracted by a small set of private investors。 In other words， argues that governments absorb the downside in many high-risk projects whereas the upside Discusses when the concepts of value creation and value extraction can be mistaken for oneanother and proposes that government activities are not merely costs but rather do create value。Highlights that governments to not reap the deserved benefits of their contributions， as compensation for their risk-taking on the taxpayers' behalf is too often extracted by a small set of private investors。 In other words， argues that governments absorb the downside in many high-risk projects whereas the upside value is 'inequitably' extracted by later stage investors。This creates an undesired cultural outcome where competencies and talent are incentivised to accrue in the private sector， compounding these underlying incentives and exacerbating wealth inequality further。The author raises a number of questions and wishes to create a public debate about what 'creating value' truly means in a society。The author does not necessarily provide an answer to the question asked but does provide a number of relevant critiques and engages this important topic from an economist's perspective。 It wasn't an easy read but would recommend it to those interested in societal purpose， economics， and inequality。 。。。more

Carl ，

I'm pretty disappointed in this work。 I was expecting something original， a new & rigorous theory of value。 Mazzucato writes a great deal about value。 She points out that our view of value is strictly a derived one based on marginal utility。 If we're willing to pay for something， it must have value， ipso facto。 But she leaves it there。 We're still waiting for someone to tell us， in a rigorous way， how to identify value & then to use it as a basis for national goal setting。 Mazzucato does a prett I'm pretty disappointed in this work。 I was expecting something original， a new & rigorous theory of value。 Mazzucato writes a great deal about value。 She points out that our view of value is strictly a derived one based on marginal utility。 If we're willing to pay for something， it must have value， ipso facto。 But she leaves it there。 We're still waiting for someone to tell us， in a rigorous way， how to identify value & then to use it as a basis for national goal setting。 Mazzucato does a pretty good job off telling us what's wrong - maximization of shareholder value to a large extent - & what's right - the guidance afforded by the writings of Keynes & Piketty but we already knew most if not all of that。 。。。more

Joel Nash ，

It is not an easy read if you don’t have a baseline comprehension of certain economic concepts。

Amin Mo ，

Economics is a theory， therefore， most of this discussion in the world of economics revolves around differing opinions and perspectives regarding economic development， how can it be achieved， and it’s relation to other aspects such as - and mostly - the environment。 Anyway， this book was the case; I did not agree with all of it， nevertheless， I have it five stars because of the fact that it was insightful。The definition of value and productivity has changed tremendously over the years， and I bel Economics is a theory， therefore， most of this discussion in the world of economics revolves around differing opinions and perspectives regarding economic development， how can it be achieved， and it’s relation to other aspects such as - and mostly - the environment。 Anyway， this book was the case; I did not agree with all of it， nevertheless， I have it five stars because of the fact that it was insightful。The definition of value and productivity has changed tremendously over the years， and I believe that the modern-day school of thought is the more accurate one - I disagreed with Smith’s labour of theory value， and still do after reading the book。 When it comes to the writer’s perspective， a good deal of emphasis was invested in addressing the financial industry and manifesting it as somewhat of “rent-seekers” - a term used by value theory which might not have been used explicitly by the writer for text financial industry， but it is similar in the way it was resembled。 Financial entities are looked upon to be only reaping profits without making value， I disagree with this a stick with the marginalist thought， seeing that financial institutions create a myriad of values to the economy by providing different services which prove to be beneficial。The book tackles the subject of economic value theory whilst also being insightful about modern markets and giving interesting information about the industry。 。。。more

Jonathan Glen ，

With this book， Mazzucato isn’t looking to pay down strict new rules， rather open the conversation as to what we currently value and how change could revitalise our societies。 A bold， hopeful book。

Jessica Rowe ，

Bloody great book。

Milja ，

Discussions that should be raised much more in the field of economics: where does value come from in our society？ And why we ended up with such strict narratives of what creates value in our society。

Pinar ，

Kütüphanden sesli kitap olarak ödünç aldım， bitiremeden süresi doldu， ikinci kez tekrar baştan başladım。 İlk bölümler ekonomi tarihi 101 tadında， ilk ekonomi teorilerinden， Marx'a diğer ekonomi teorilerine yer veriliyor。 Ekonomi konusunda genel perspektif açısından faydalı。 Çeşitli ekonomi kavramlarını da öğreniyorsunuz。 Sonlara doğru daha fazla tekrarlamaya döndü。 Kütüphanden sesli kitap olarak ödünç aldım， bitiremeden süresi doldu， ikinci kez tekrar baştan başladım。 İlk bölümler ekonomi tarihi 101 tadında， ilk ekonomi teorilerinden， Marx'a diğer ekonomi teorilerine yer veriliyor。 Ekonomi konusunda genel perspektif açısından faydalı。 Çeşitli ekonomi kavramlarını da öğreniyorsunuz。 Sonlara doğru daha fazla tekrarlamaya döndü。 。。。more

Philipp ，

Its a good inteoduction to how the theory of value developed， capturing this topic is in itself notoriously difficultMerged review:Its a good inteoduction to how the theory of value developed， capturing this topic is in itself notoriously difficult

Christopher Mitchell ，

I picked this book up， not knowing if I would really get into it。 I greatly enjoyed the Entrepreneurial State and wasn't sure I was as interested in a treatise on "value。" It turns out I was。 The history of how "value" was framed and is critical to economic thought is presented in an interesting and accessible manner。 As is common with a successful book in this style， it connected a variety of half-baked thoughts that were already rattling around my head。 The argument is compelling and long over I picked this book up， not knowing if I would really get into it。 I greatly enjoyed the Entrepreneurial State and wasn't sure I was as interested in a treatise on "value。" It turns out I was。 The history of how "value" was framed and is critical to economic thought is presented in an interesting and accessible manner。 As is common with a successful book in this style， it connected a variety of half-baked thoughts that were already rattling around my head。 The argument is compelling and long overdue - the absurdity of how many fail to properly account for the tremendous value public investments have created should be enough to discredit anyone using such models。 When attempting to dismantle such a strong， though obviously flawed， common belief， it can be hard to painstakingly assemble a logical argument。 But she did and it was a joy to read。 。。。more

Matt Reid ，

I hope that this wonderful book starts a much-needed discussion about the economic activity we should value。 Value creation is very different than value extraction， and what good old Adam Smith wanted us （our economy） to be free of was not government regulation but rather rent-seeking behavior。 Mazzucato clearly makes her case that we need to remedy everything from how we issue patents to how we provide aid to companies that would never have existed without public investment。

Harry ，

Before reading this book I had heard interviews with Mazzucato and read plenty of articles， so I knew what to expect and what my opinions on the subject matter were。 Even so I found it incredibly valuable and feel that the thorough explanation given is robust， leaving me even more excited for her next book。 I am slightly cautious that it may have been reinforcing my opinions but am glad to have such strong explanations to reassure me （and others）。

Seng Wee Wong ，

I think this book is written by a very knowledgeable person and in term of the content， there are many merits to reading this book。 The term “value” is very subjective and is often associated with many economic concepts。 I think you’ll enjoy reading this book if you have a background in economics but for a layman like me， I find it hard to follow through all the ideas mentioned in the book。 Many examples were given in the explanation of the chapters but within these examples， many acronyms were I think this book is written by a very knowledgeable person and in term of the content， there are many merits to reading this book。 The term “value” is very subjective and is often associated with many economic concepts。 I think you’ll enjoy reading this book if you have a background in economics but for a layman like me， I find it hard to follow through all the ideas mentioned in the book。 Many examples were given in the explanation of the chapters but within these examples， many acronyms were used。 It made the book harder for me to digest。One example brought up in the book stood out to me: the way pharmaceutical products are priced。 Normally people would assume that a drug is priced according to the manufacturing cost of the pills but that is not usually the case in the pharmaceutical industry。 Instead， many of the drugs are priced according to the “value” it provided to the patient in terms of mitigating pain/suffering and improving the quality of life of patients。 To quote an example in the book， A three-month treatment costs $84，000 for a hepatitis C patient （exactly $1，000 a pill） when the manufacturing cost the drug is only between $68 and $136。 Something sounds fishy here。。。Also I learnt about the cycle of value generation in a perfect economy and how producers and consumers interact to grow an economy。 Governments bear the burden of running an economy and it is definitely not easy to ensure public welfare and the country’s constant wealth generation。 There are too many economic concepts mentioned in this book to summarise but reading this book did expand my breadth of knowledge on economics。 。。。more

Mika ，

Mazzucaton keskeinen väittämä on， että julkisen sektorin roolia vähätellään nykyisessä talouskeskustelussa。 Julkisen sektorin roolista on toki kiistelty noin sata vuotta， ja Mazzucato onnistuukin tiivistämään tämän keskustelun hienosti， mutta kirjailija myös tuo keskusteluun uuden näkökulman: arvon。 Mazzucaton kritiikin mukaan taloustiede on hylännyt arvon käsitteen ja sen sijaan keskittyy helpompaan "hyödyn" （utility） käsitteeseen， mikä saa tietyt toimet näyttäytymään arvokkaampina tai arvottom Mazzucaton keskeinen väittämä on， että julkisen sektorin roolia vähätellään nykyisessä talouskeskustelussa。 Julkisen sektorin roolista on toki kiistelty noin sata vuotta， ja Mazzucato onnistuukin tiivistämään tämän keskustelun hienosti， mutta kirjailija myös tuo keskusteluun uuden näkökulman: arvon。 Mazzucaton kritiikin mukaan taloustiede on hylännyt arvon käsitteen ja sen sijaan keskittyy helpompaan "hyödyn" （utility） käsitteeseen， mikä saa tietyt toimet näyttäytymään arvokkaampina tai arvottomampina kuin ne "oikeasti" ovat。 Kirja toimii hyvänä taloustieteen minihistoriikkina ja osasta Mazzucaton väittämistä on helppo olla samaa mieltä。 Kuitenkin väittämät perustuvat enemmänkin järkeilyyn ja tarkoituksenmukaisesti valittuihin esimerkkeihin kuin varsinaiseen tutkimustietoon， joten kirjaa kannattaa lukea tietyllä skeptisyydellä。 Mazzucato on kuitenkin vaikutusvaltainen ajattelija， joten hänen näkemyksiinsä kannattaa perehtyä。 Kirja on hieman raskaslukuinen ja toistoa on runsaasti。 。。。more

Wouter Zwemmer ，

Een urgent en belangrijk boek over waardecreatie， het onttrekken van waarde en de essentiële verschillen tussen die twee。“Dit is wat filosofen ‘performativiteit’ noemen: hoe we over dingen praten is van invloed op hoe we ons gedragen， en dientengevolge hoe we erover theoretiseren。” Ik lees het boek van Mariana Mazzucato vlak nadat muitende Amerikanen het Capitool hebben bestormd， opgehitst door de president zelf via communicatiekanalen van Big Tech: Twitter， Parler， Telegram en ongetwijfeld ande Een urgent en belangrijk boek over waardecreatie， het onttrekken van waarde en de essentiële verschillen tussen die twee。“Dit is wat filosofen ‘performativiteit’ noemen: hoe we over dingen praten is van invloed op hoe we ons gedragen， en dientengevolge hoe we erover theoretiseren。” Ik lees het boek van Mariana Mazzucato vlak nadat muitende Amerikanen het Capitool hebben bestormd， opgehitst door de president zelf via communicatiekanalen van Big Tech: Twitter， Parler， Telegram en ongetwijfeld andere。 Mazzucato schetst een wereldbeeld met “（。。。） privaat ondernemerschap het snelle jachtluipaard dat de wereld innovaties schenkt， en de overheid als voortmodderende schildpad die de vooruitgang in de weg staat。” Ze spreekt over een verhaal van goed tegen kwaad， precies het verhaal dat Trump zijn aanhang inpepert， en het gekke is: die mensen geloven hem。。。 Mazzucato legt in haar boek uit wat daar gek aan is。Aantekeningen voor mezelf gemaakt。 Is één grote spoiler。PlunderenMazzucato maakt een punt van het verschil tussen waarde creëren en onttrekken。 Iedereen weet dat Hema bijna is bezweken aan de schuldenlast die het bedrijf opgelegd heeft gekregen door voormalige eigenaren。 Terwijl grote aantallen mensen， gezinnen en leveranciers afhankelijk waren van Hema voor werk en inkomen。 De investeerders in Hema werden rijk van de onttrekkingen aan het bedrijf， de werknemers zien het misschien als plunderen。 Een ander voorbeeld is het truuken met vestigingsplaats， desnoods alleen op papier （dan werkt er niemand）， om belasting te ontwijken - de Ierland-route voor IT-bedrijven en de trust-kantoren in Nederland。 Mazzucato maakt overtuigend haar punt dat belasting betalen voor bedrijven een compensatie is voor de technologieën en infrastructuren waar deze bedrijven gebruik van maken。Neoliberalisme en overheidIn 2018 publiceerde The Economist het essay ‘Reinventing liberalism for the 21st century’ om haar 175-jarige bestaan te vieren。 Ergens met lieden zoals Ronald Reagan en Margret Thatcher is het liberalisme overgegaan in neoliberalisme met de doctrine dat de overheid het probleem is en niet de oplossing （dixit R。 Reagan）。 Sindsdien hebben we de financiële crisis gehad， de klimaatcrisis en nu de coronapandemie。 Deze crisissen zijn allemaal niet veroorzaakt door de overheid en de overheid treedt hier op als redder van ofwel banken， bedrijfsleven ofwel als innovator en katalysator zoals bij de klimaatcrisis en de coronapandemie。 Tel hier bij op de crisissen die voortkomen uit neoliberale politiek zoals in Nederland de crisis in de zorg door marktwerking en de toeslagenaffaire wegens ontspoord wantrouwen jegens bijstandstrekkers die er in het neoliberale denken eigenlijk helemaal niet behoren te zijn。 De route voor mensen om zich uit armoede te werken is niet repressie maar ontwikkeling - en welke markt zorgt er voor ontwikkeling van burgers tot， noem eens wat， capabele werknemers？ Inderdaad: geen markt， want de overheid zorgt voor onderwijs。 De overheid moet zich afzijdig houden bij vrijheid van dwang （zie: Isaiah Berlin）， maar aanwezig zijn voor onderwijs， cultuur， sociale zekerheid en als vormgever en bewaker van democratie en rechtsstaat。 Mensen zijn naast consumenten ook burgers en kiezers; dus dienen we drie soorten vrijheden te waarborgen: （1） ondernemerschap， （2） naar eigen inzicht te leven， （3） zo te kiezen dat de democratie het beste wordt beschermd。 Als dat laatste een morele plicht was， had populisme geen bestaansrecht。。。 Van deze drie vrijheden heeft het neoliberalisme enkel oog voor de eerste。 Hoog tijd om met een frisse blik te kijken naar de relatie tussen overheid en markt - dat is wat Mazzucato in dit boek doet。WaardeEssentieel voor deze discussie is de definitie van ‘waarde’。 Mazzucato definieert waarde als “（。。。） het voortbrengen van nieuwe goederen en diensten。” Ze onderscheidt dit van ‘economische waarde’， wat volgens haar bestaat uit:- Productie: het voortbrengen van outputs- Verdeling: hoe goederen en diensten worden gedeeld （let op haar terminologie: ge- niet ver-） binnen de economie - Herinvestering: wat er gebeurt met de winsten van productieWaardecreatie is “（。。。） de manieren waarop verschillende soorten hulpmiddelen （menselijke， fysieke en immateriële） tot stand komen en op elkaar inwerken om nieuwe goederen en diensten voort te brengen。” Waardeonttrekking is “（。。。） activiteiten die gericht zijn op transacties met betrekking tot reeds bestaande hulpmiddelen en outputs， en waarbij disproportionele winsten worden gerealiseerd。” Mazzucato wijst op een schijnbaar ouderwets concept， namelijk dat bij het vaststellen van waarde ook een rol speelt of datgene wat geschapen wordt intrinsiek nuttig is。 Bijvoorbeeld een nieuwe fabriek kan economisch waardevol zijn， maar wegens vervuiling toch niet。Mazzucato onderscheidt waarde van rijkdom。 Waarde is een proces， iets wat wordt gecreëerd。 Rijkdom is een verzameling， een voorraad van reeds gecreëerde waarde。 In oude economische theorie is de waarde van een goed of dienst de resultante van de condities waaronder die waren geproduceerd: lonen werden bepaald door het aanbod van arbeid （compensatie voor opgegeven vrije tijd） en de arbeidsomstandigheden。 Kortom: waarde bepaalt prijs。 In hedendaagse theorieën bepalen vraagvoorkeuren （hoeveel iemand bereid is ergens voor te betalen） en schaarste de prijs van een goed of dienst， waarmee kosten voor arbeid los werden gekoppeld van de eindprijs van het goed of de dienst。 In deze visie bepaalt prijs waarde。 het hedendaagse denken heeft een aantal negatieve consequenties:- Alles zonder prijs is waardeloos: verzorging van dierbaren bijvoorbeeld， of natuur （lucht， water） met vervuiling als gevolg。 - Handel en financiële diensten produceren niets， maar worden opeens ‘waardevol’。 In de praktijk overvleugelen ze veelal productie。- Overheid heeft geen waarde。- Waarde komt onder macht tot stand: uitbuiting van arbeid。Je kunt denken dat er een onderscheid is tussen doeners en pakkers， maar het gaat Mazzucato erom om duurzame productie weer centraal te stellen en handel en financiële diensten te laten faciliteren。 ProductiegrensDe productiegrens is het onderscheid tussen activiteiten die waarde voortbrengen （productief） of niet （improductief）。 Binnen de grens zijn de scheppers van rijkdom， buiten de grens degenen die baat hebben bij rijkdom omdat ze profiteren van rent-seeking wegens een monopoliepositie of omdat rijkdom ten gunste van hen wordt herverdeeld （bijv via sociale uitkeringen）。 De criteria voor dit onderscheid hebben verschild in de loop van de tijd。 De ‘vader van de economie’ François Quesnay （17e eeuw） beschouwde landbouw als productief， en alle andere arbeid niet。 Klassieke politieke economen Adam Smith， David Ricardo en Karl Marx deelden de opvatting dat waarde voortkwam uit de kosten van productie （vnl arbeid）。 SmithAdam Smith is de bedenker van arbeidsdeling en groei van productiviteit door specialisatie。 Plus natuurlijk de ‘onzichtbare hand’ van de markt die bepalend is voor interactie tussen consumenten en producenten。 Hij bedacht dat waarde ontstaat bij industrie-arbeid。 En dat kapitalisme is gegrondvest op streven naar eigenbelang en competitie。 Volgens hem moeten arbeiders meer produceren dan voor henzelf nodig is。 Van dit ‘surplus’ kunnen improductieve mensen leven。 Productiegrens ligt bij Msith tussen materiële en immateriële arbeid。 Volgens Smith kon een economie groeien door het surplus niet te verkwisten maar te investeren in meer productieve arbeid， een indirecte aanval op de levensstijl van adel。 Smith identificeerde drie vormen van inkomsten:- Loon door arbeid- Winst op bezit van kapitaal- Rent: pachten voor grondbezit （adel）。 Rents konden ook worden geheven op andere monopolies: importeren van goederen， pleiten voor een rechtbank。 Smith pleitte voor een vrije markt als vrij van monopolies en rents。RicardoDavid Ricardo voegde aan Smith toe: inkomensverdeling in een economie。 Nb hij was zelf schatrijk geworden met speculatie / rentseeking。 Volgens Ricardo is rent de overdracht van geld aan grondbezitters omdat zij het monopolie hebben op het schaarse goed grondbezit。 Deze rents verdwijnen niet wegens concurrentie maar houden stand door machtsverhoudingen。 De rent blijven hoog door concurrentie onder pachters （boeren）。 Kort gezegd zou dit leiden tot hogere rents en voedselprijzen。 Daarmee tot hogere lonen in industrie en lagere winsten om te investeren， dus minder groei。 Steeds meer van het nationale inkomen zou naar grondbezitters gaan。 Tegenwoordig zijn er meer monopolies en schaarse bronnen van rents: olie， patenten， vastgoed。 Tegenwoordig wordt de financiële sector （improductieve rent seekers） zo groot dat de economie stagneert。 Veelal trekt de ongeschoolde arbeidersklasse zonder onderhandelingsmacht aan het kortste eind， vlgs Ricardo - is nu nog steeds zo。 Ricardo onderscheidt productiegrens in de consumptie met productieve en improductieve consumptie:- Productieve consumptie: winst investeren in groei en nieuwe arbeid。 Industriële kapitalisten。- Improductief: opmaken aan luxe of niet gebruiken （oppotten） waardoor het aan waarde verliest。 Adel， elite。Ricardo en Smith zagen over het hoofd: de rol van de overheid bij het creëren van de condities voor productiviteit: infrastructuur， nationale defensie en rechtstaat。 Ricardo zag ook over het hoofd: kapitalisten strijken met de opbrengst van arbeid waardoor de ongelijkheid toeneemt。MarxKarl Marx voegde aan het discours toe dat definities van productieve activiteiten afhankelijk zijn van historische omstandigheden， de samenleving op een gegeven moment。 Tevens introductie van het begrip ‘ruilwaarde’: als goederen worden verkocht （geruild）; goederen voor eigen consumptie van landheren hebben geen ruilwaarde。 Ruilwaarde is de uitkristallisering van de intrinsieke waarde van goederen。 Kapitalisten laten arbeiders meer werken dan zij nodig hebben voor minimum levensstandaard （onderdak， voedsel）; dat surplus steken ze in hun eigen zak - dit noemt Marx uitbuiting。 Omdat arbeiders de kapitaalmiddelen niet bezitten en vergaand specialiseren in delen van het productieproces noemt Marx ze vervreemd。 De productiegrens is volgens Marx als volgt: productief is wie er deelneemt aan kapitalistische productie en wie het surplus ontvangt。 Marx introduceert ‘commercieel kapitaal’: handel， om goederen van producent naar afnemer te krijgen; idem betalingsverkeer。 Comm kap houdt zich alleen bezig met circulatie van waarde， produceert zelf niet en zijn dus improductief。 Aanvankelijk doet de industrie dat zelf， door specialisatie ontstaan goederen- en geldkapitalisten。 Marx introduceert rentedragend kapitaal， wat improductief is。De vraag na dit alles is wel: als arbeid waarde produceert en financiers niet， waarom blijven arbeiders dan arm en worden financiers rijk？Nieuw begrip: nut = subjectieve waarde。 Marginaal nut = hoeveel voldoening een extra product je geeft （de eerste chocoreep van de dag is lekker， na 10 ben je misselijk）。 Economie ook wel gedefinieerd als ‘de studie van allocatie van hulpbronnen onder omstandigheden van schaarste。’ De productiegrens lost nu bijna op: alles wat op een vrije markt wordt verhandeld is productief。 Waar bij Smith en Ricardo het onttrekken van rents nog werden gezien als semi-parasiteit gedrag， wordt het nu gezien als inkomen als het op een markt is ontstaan。 Vragen van deze tijdDe vragen van de huidige tijd zijn:- Hoe meten we bbp。 Het bbp geeft “heel vreemde resultaten” zoals “（。。。） de onderwaardering van zekere activiteiten （zoals de zorg voor onze kinderen） en de overwaardering van andere （zoals vervuilende bedrijven）。”- Hoe kijken we tegen de financiële sector en financialisering van de economie aan。 “（。。。） een van de voornaamste problemen van het moderne kapitalisme: de waarde-onttrekkende activiteiten van de financiële sector。”- Hoe zien we de rol van de overheid- Hoe sturen we de economie richting innovatie， inversteringen， duurzaamheid en inclusie？BbpBbp = som van alle inkomsten minus uitgaven in de economie van een land。 Te berekenen via productie （alle geproduceerde goederen en diensten）， inkomen （alle gegenereerde inkomens） en bestedingen （alle gekochte goederen en diensten incl voorraden）。 Alleen de overheid en uitkeringen valt buiten de productiegrens。 Problemen met bbp:- Hoe prijs je overheidsdiensten en investeringen？- Hoe investeringen in toekomstige productie capaciteit （scholing， r&d） te waarderen？- Hoe werk met extreem hoge inkomens （fin sector） te behandelen？- Hoe omgaan met belangrijke diensten waarvoor geen prijs tot stand komt （zorg voor kinderen） of geen legale prijs （zwarte markt）？- Hoe om te gaan met kosten waarvoor geen prijs tot stand komt （vervuiling）？“Daarmee rechtvaardigt het systeem excessieve ongelijkheid van inkomens en vermogens en maakt het waarde-onttrekking tot waardeschepping。”Financiële sectorVroeger werd de fin sector gezien als verdeler van waarde。 Later als cruciaal voor het kanaliseren van gelden van beleggers naar productieve industrie。 Altijd liggen hier risico’s van woekeren en fraude op de loer wegens monopoliemacht， vandaar regulering noodzakelijk。 Plus dat banken en bankiers werken voor hun eigen belang ipv dat van groene industriën。 Dit leidt tot speculatie （en excessen doordat de hoogste risico’s het meeste opbrengen） en beïnvloeding van de reële economie in het belang van de bankiers， een vorm van marktfalen。 Geld als doel op zich; speculatieve financiering: nastreven van rendementen op basis van waardestijging van activa in plaats van het genereren van inkomen uit productie。 “Ongeduldige financiën - de zoektocht naar de snelle rendementen - kunnen de productieve capaciteit van de economie en het potentieel voor innovatie schaden。”AandeelhouderswaardeOp enig moment is maximaliseren van aandeelhouderswaarde het belangrijkste criterium voor bedrijfssucces geworden， mede onder invloed van ongeduldige financiën。 Dit heeft negatieve effecten zoals een korte termijn focus， eigenbelang van managers， r&d en andere investeringen beknotten etc。 Volgens Mazzucato moeten de excessieve beloningen van managers worden gereduceerd ten gunste van andere stakeholders。 InnovatieWaarde-onttrekking in moderne innovatie-economie:- Invloed van financiële sector op technologie-ontwikkeling- Stelsel van intellectueel eigendom dat bedrijven in staat stelt innovatie af te schermen- Prijzen doen geen recht aan de bijdragen van collectieve middelen aan innovatie- Aard van netwerk-innovaties waardoor first mover een monopolie verwerft。Publieke sectorVolgens Mazzucato wordt de publieke sector in het huidige ver-finansialiseerde economische denken ondergewaardeerd。 In dat denken moet de overheid zoveel mogelijk worden teruggedrongen， zowel qua bestedingen als qua regulering。 Terwijl het de overheid was die de economie redde in 2008 en daarna， in de financiële crisis die was veroorzaakt door de particuliere sector。 Daarnaast betoogt Mazzucato dat de overheid zorgt voor investeringen in voorwaarden voor groei op de lange termijn: onderwijs， gezondheidszorg， infrastructuur， onderzoek en innovatie。 Volgens Mazzucato is het niet de omvang van de overheid of de ratio van schuld tot het bbp die telt， maar waaraan de overheid geld uitgeeft。 Volgens haar moet zij investeren in zaken die het bbp verhogen en toekomstige groei mogelijk maken: beroepsopleidingen， nieuwe technologie， r&d。 Blind bezuinigen kan juist een averechts effect hebben op de economische groei。 Waar de overheid volgens haar zich niet mee bezig moet houden vanuit het perspectief van economische groei， is: verdringen van de private sector， teveel beperkingen opleggen aan de priv sector， zich bemoeien met de levens van mensen。 Het probleem bij waardescheppende activiteiten van de overheid is dat de waarde vaak onzichtbaar is omdat die verdwijnt in de zakken van de particuliere sector。 Anticyclisch Keynes beschreef voor het eerst dat markten inherent instabiel zijn en tijdens recessie blijven steken in inactiviteit wegens pessimistische verwachtingen over de toekomst。 Onder die omstandigheden is de overheid ‘besteder in laatste instantie。’ De overheid kan ingrijpen met extra uitgaven， waardoor de verwachtingen positiever worden en de part sector weer gaat investeren en produceren。 Waarde stimuleren via de vraag dus， ipv via het aanbod。 De overheid moet daarvoor lenen waardoor staatsschuld in een recessie toeneemt; dat is het gevolg van de recessie， niet de oorzaak - na herstel van de schuld worden afgelost。 Dit concept is door inmiddels welvarende landen succesvol toegepast in de jaren 30， na de oorlog， in de financiële crisis en nu in de coronapandemie。Overheid in hoogconjunctuurHuidige economen accepteren Keynes’ anticyclische aanpak in recessie maar stellen dat extra overheidsuitgaven bij hoogconjunctuur leiden tot inflatie （oa Friedman）。 Mazzucato betoogt dat die niet klopt vanwege:- Ook in hoogconjunctuur draait de economie op veel plekken niet op volledige capaciteit， dus prijzen stijgen dan niet bij meer vraag。- Groeiend overheidstekort zou leiden tot hogere rente。 Dat klopt niet omdat rente niet op een markt wordt bepaald maar door de centrale bank via monetair beleid。- Lagere rentes leiden niet per se tot meer investeren。 Die worden gedreven door groeiverwachtingen en die worden weer gestimuleerd door overheidsbestedingen。Mazzucato somt de volgende bezwaren op tegen het overheid-is-geldverspilling-denken en wijdt dit deels aan de manier waarop overheidsbijdragen worden gemeten en gerapporteerd:- Overheidsfinanciën laten alleen kosten zien。 De opbrengsten liggen im de particuliere sector en de samenleving。- De aanname dat overheid geen rendement op haar investeringen realiseert is onjuist。 Is een politieke keuze。- Definitie dat output van overheid gelijk is aan de waarde van de input is onjuist。 Ook de overheid verbetert haar productiviteit。 Nb niet elke reductie van inputs resulteert in verbetering van output， zie wachtlijsten in de zorg。- Overheidsbedrijven die werken als bedrijven worden meegeteld in de private sector。 Daarmee ontstaat een vertekend beeld van de waardecreatie door de publieke sector。- Nationale statistieken houden geen rekening met het multiplier-effect van de interactie tussen overheidsuitgaven en andere componenten van het bbp。 Uit recent imf-onderzoek blijken overheidsuitgaven een multiplier te hebben van 1，5。OverheidsfalenOverheidsfalen = als beleidsmakers private belangen nastreven: nepotisme， vriendjespolitiek， corruptie， rent-seeking， misallocatie van hulpmiddelen （verliezers stimuleren）， oneigenlijke concurrentie met private partijen。 Overheid is van nature gevoelig voor falen omdat de principal en de agent dicht op elkaar zitten。 Uit angst voor overheidfalen zijn veel activiteiten geprivatiseerd en uitbesteed （=indirecte privatisering）。 Echter， er is veel voor te zeggen dat de overheid een significant aandeel houdt in natuurlijke monopolies voor schaalvoordelen en voorkomen speculatieve rent-seeking。 Het alternatief is sterk gereguleerd kapitalisme; dat heeft in de praktijk laten zien gevoelig te zijn voor vriendjespolitiek en corruptie。 Level playing fieldVolgens marktdenkers moet de overheid zorgen voor een gelijkwaardig speelveld voor private partijen。 Echter， de grote uitdagingen van nu vereisen sturing， een ‘hellend speelveld’ naar minder vervuiling， goed werk voor iedereen， minder inkomensongelijkheid， betere zorg en pensioenen。 Mazzucato pleit voor een nieuw economisch denken， weg van rent-seeking en economie van zelfverrijking-ten-koste-van， naar een ‘economie van hoop’: “als we niet kunnen dromen van een betere toekomst en proberen die te laten gebeuren， is er geen echte reden om ons druk te maken over waarde。” Dixit Mariana Mazzucato， wat een verfrissende denker。 。。。more

Arif Khan ，

While I am not a student of finance Mazzucato has made sure that everyone understands her viewpoint。 She takes a very radical approach in redefining what we consider valuable。 I believe with tremendous shifts possible in the way we bank， buy， and fund， understanding where 'value' lies might be really important。 I would say that it is a must-read for people in business because 'value' is being redefined as people get more information， and consequently create new biases and abandon the old。 While I am not a student of finance Mazzucato has made sure that everyone understands her viewpoint。 She takes a very radical approach in redefining what we consider valuable。 I believe with tremendous shifts possible in the way we bank， buy， and fund， understanding where 'value' lies might be really important。 I would say that it is a must-read for people in business because 'value' is being redefined as people get more information， and consequently create new biases and abandon the old。 。。。more

Maria ，

Very interesting; a sharp critique of mainstream economics and the implications for policy today。 A lot of very useful information packed in。

Cgallozzi ，

"The Value of Everything"Making and Taking in the Global EconomyMariana Mazzucato"。。。A cynic is a man who knows the PRICE of everything and the VALUE of nothing。。。。"Character of Lord Darlington"Lady Windemere's Fan"Oscar Wile， 1893A discussion of the economic concept of "value" from a left leaning economist。 Even with a "bias detector" turned on - there are some interesting histories and concepts here that bear serious additional discussion and analysis。My three threads of discussion in this boo "The Value of Everything"Making and Taking in the Global EconomyMariana Mazzucato"。。。A cynic is a man who knows the PRICE of everything and the VALUE of nothing。。。。"Character of Lord Darlington"Lady Windemere's Fan"Oscar Wile， 1893A discussion of the economic concept of "value" from a left leaning economist。 Even with a "bias detector" turned on - there are some interesting histories and concepts here that bear serious additional discussion and analysis。My three threads of discussion in this book included:#1。 Economic （Value Added） History of "Value"。#2。 Value Creation and Value Extraction。#3。 Undervaluing the Public Sector。#1。 Economic （Value Added） History of "Value"It was good to review what the economists have， over time thought about what "Value was" how it was created and who created it。 Mazzucato reviews the Physiocrats - land generated value; Mercantilists - trade - and then the Classical Economists - Smith， Ricardo and Marx - Entreprenurial Management Created Value and Labor Created Value。Mazzucato reviews how the theory of value has changed over time to be more in alignment with the mainstream thought of the societies of the time。Good to review this - a long time since Samuelson's 7th edition of his Economics Textbook。#2。 Value Creation and Value ExtractionThis section makes reference to her economic value added worldview that both value creation and value extraction are ongoing within today's society。Mazzucato believes that strategies such as share buy backs， "economic rents" and "financial engineering" are value extracting。 Strategies that reduce the amount of funds the corporation is able to invest in future operations （r & d， process improvements and） represents Value Extraction。 She associates the benefits from this strategy as going to 'the few' - fueling income inequality。 She believes that a firms' ability to invest will in the longer run create more business lines and employment which represents one vision of "the greatest good for the greatest number" （Jeremy Bentham， 1776）。Mazzucato believes that the traditional production-sales model creates value - although she believes that especially Hi-Tech firms have benefited from technologies developed by the Government without having to pay anything for their use。#3。 Undervaluing the Public SectorThings are only valued if they are priced。Spousal housework is not paid for- and not counted in G。D。P。As an extension of this the U。S。 Government has invested funds and developed technologies - DARPA， Internet and Chip Technology; NIH BioTech research， HIV treatments。The above technologies have been "open sourced" and adopted by companies。 Apple iPhone uses Chip， Network， Touch Screen and GPS technology developed by the Government without payment。 Apple also creates value through system engineering， testing， marketing and distribution。 Apple however has benefited from use of what was the U。S。 Government's developed technologies。Within the Energy market - the U。S。 Government provided battery technology and loaned $ to both Solyndra and to Tesla。 Solyndra went bankrupt - Tesla "made it"。 The U。S。 Government did not take any equity position in Tesla as collateral for their loan; additionally Tesla used the technology provided without paying royalties。The overall idea is a recapitulation of Mazzucato's "The Entreprenurial Sate" concept that the Government has and can delivery value for which it should be recognized and rewarded - using models such a modified Venture Capital （and Portfolio Management） as one example。 Taking equity position in BioTechnology and Pharmaceutical companies could provide widespread benefits - lower costs - royalty payments - $ value of firms stock- returned to the Government and etc。Mazzucato closes with the outline of her next book about a Mission-Oriented Government which can do "big things" - Moonshot， WW2 victory and etc。There are some interesting ideas and history here。There are more than a few problematic areas though。 Since Ronald Reagan/Margaret Thatcher the Government has been 'talked down' - and relegated to a regulatory role - versus the "wisdom of the market"。Rehabilitating the Government's reputation first and capabilities second is a long term project。 How the Government will respond to the COVID19 and economic problems after the new administration will be a test。 I don't believe there is public support for the Government taking on "Moonshot" type projects except COVID19 and economic problems; I also don't believe there is political will to do this - and finally I'm not sure the Government has the capabilities - space exploration has been outsourced see Space X。A good history - some interesting ideas about Government and 'value'。 How the capabilities of Government are enhanced - project management and other technical skills is not addressed。Should be of interest to those who read Economic History and to those who are thinking about how to solve today's large societal problems。Carl GallozziCgallozzi@comcast。net 。。。more

Kingsborough Library ，

A bit polemical， but I learned a few things。

S ，

A highly accessible and timely account of how mainstream or 'marginalist' economics has completely skewed our understanding of value， and therefore， what is （and isn't） valuable。 She couches her analysis in the history of economic thought， demonstrating impeccable research and knowledge of subject without ever alienating a lay readership。 Ultimately， the question this book asks， if not exactly answers， is what is the nature of value， and how can we arrive at a working definition that will enable A highly accessible and timely account of how mainstream or 'marginalist' economics has completely skewed our understanding of value， and therefore， what is （and isn't） valuable。 She couches her analysis in the history of economic thought， demonstrating impeccable research and knowledge of subject without ever alienating a lay readership。 Ultimately， the question this book asks， if not exactly answers， is what is the nature of value， and how can we arrive at a working definition that will enable us to shape our economies and societies to effectively maximise public value， helping us to find equitable solutions to the impending challenges of 21st Century。 。。。more

Reference

google book https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=The Value of Everything: Making and Taking in the Global Economy

hathitrust digital library https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/ls?q1=The Value of Everything: Making and Taking in the Global Economy&field1=ocr&a=srchls&ft=ft&lmt=ft

The British Library https://bll01.primo.exlibrisgroup.com/discovery/search?query=any,contains,The Value of Everything: Making and Taking in the Global Economy&tab=LibraryCatalog&search_scope=Not_BL_Suppress&vid=44BL_INST:BLL01&lang=en&offset=0