deucy,there is so much of value and insight in Skidelsky's lecture at the London School of Economics that I simply can't do it justice with even an extensive summary. His talk was a masterful synthesis of twentieth century western hemisphere economics. Only someone with Skidelski's broad experience and deep knowledge of the history of economic thought could so clearly lay out the similarities and differences of the main schools of economic thinking that grew out of, followed, and now supersede the classical economics of Adam Smith. And too, his presentation is entertaining. Certainly worth an hour of anyone's time who has the least interest in economics. I would urge you to bookmark the link and go to it whenever you can spare the time. You won't regret it, I promise.
I'll simply mention a few things that pop up in his presentation to whet your appetite. Skidelsky says that in the 50's through the 70's we had Capital, Labor, and Government, but now we have only Capital. This is brilliant insight that I have never heard expressed so clearly. During the 1950's through the 1970's wages grew with productivity, but now we find productivity growing and wages stagnating, or even declining. In his talk he mentions and comments on Keynes, Friedman, Marx, Stiglitz, Krugman, Greenspan, and I think Volker too, I can't remember for sure. Oh, and Bernanke also. His contrasting of Keynes with the Chicago School is very interesting. (I never could figure out whether Friedman was joking when he said he was a Keynesian. Now, after listening to Skidelsky, I think I understand in what sense Friedman meant that.) Anyway please do listen to the full lecture. You won't be sorry.
