Sem resultados pelos quais responder não há skin-in-the-game (parte II)

Na parte I, quando me referia a Schumpeter, era acerca disto: 

"Although these models [Moi ici: Teoria neoclássica] have yielded some illuminating insights, they ignore essential aspects of Schumpeterian competition-the fact that there are winners and losers and that the process is one of continuing disequilibrium. An evolutionary analysis seems required if the model is to recognize those facts.

In an evolutionary theory of the sort that we develop, the nature of the “economic problem" is fundamentally different from that depicted in contemporary orthodox theory. The latter views choice sets as known and given. The economic problem is to pick the best possible production and distribution, given that set of alternatives. The function of competition is to get- or help to get- the signals and incentives right. In evolutionary theory, choice sets are not given and the consequences of any choice are unknown. Although some choices may be clearly worse than others, there is no choice that is clearly best ex-ante. Given this assumption, one would expect to see a diversity of firm behavior in real situations. Firms facing the same market signals respond differently, and more so if the signals are relatively novel. Indeed, one would hope for such a diversity of responses in order that a range of possible behaviors might be explored. One function of competition, in the structural sense of many firms, then would be to make possible that diversity. Another function of competition, in this more active sense, is to reward and enhance the choices that prove good in practice and to suppress the bad ones. Over the long run, one hopes, the competitive system would promote firms that choose well on the average and would eliminate, or force reform upon, firms that consistently make mistakes.

In this view, the market system is (in part) a device for conducting and evaluating experiments in economic behavior and organization. The meaning and merit of competition must be appraised accordingly. … We should understand as "development," he wrote," only such changes in economic life as are not forced upon it from without but arise by its own initiative, from within" (p . 63). The key development process he identified as the "carrying out of new combinations," and in the competitive economy "new combinations mean the competitive elimination of the old" (pp. 66-67). It is the entrepreneur who carries out new combinations, who " 'leads' the means of production into new channels". and may thereby reap an entrepreneurial profit. "He also leads in the sense that he draws other producers in his branch after him. But as they are his competitors, who first reduce and then annihilate his profit, this is, as it were, leadership against one's own will""

Quando a AT ou a classe política olha para as empresas esquece esta volatilidade, esquece esta volubilidade.

Trechos retirados de "An evolutionary theory of economic change" de Richard R. Nelson.