how did new political thoughts lead to new economic ideas during the golden age?
606919
Political freedom is ultimately inseparable from economic freedom. Where you have one, the other will follow. Deprive people of one, and the other will wither.
452779
Karl Marx ideas come from Historic Materialism, and dialectic, where the destiny of Humanity is already written, Emile Durkheim gave more chance to the free will of society to have an impact.
381113
Apart from the riches brought from those far lands, there was a great contribute to science - geography, math, geometry, astronomy. etc - due to sailing. Kings became more poweful, and at the same time there was a development in the way of thinking - the Renaissance. Apart from the cultural developments, the social and economical areas also were stirred by the Discoveries. Spices and tea were as expensive as gold, gold itself came from overseas, as well as exquisite fabrics, china, and the worse part came along too: slavery.
3505
Now. Just OMO.\n  We live in luxury and comfort, with health and longevity, medical care and security, social and otherwise, enjoyed by even the lowest classes in society, that the Aristocrats, Kings and Emperors of the past, would envy, including our Education. Intellectual life was never so good, and\nwe are overwhelmed with the variety and ways we can entertain ourselves. \n  I believe that future civilisations will look back on us now as a Golden Age, perhaps calling us Roosevelts America, as some historians refer to Pericles Athens as the highpoint and golden Age of Athens and Greece.
127592
points to the self-organizing character of economies which are not centrally-planned by government. Many, such as Adam Smith, point to what is believed to be the value of individuals pursuing their self-interest as opposed to altruistically working to serve the "common good." Karl Polanyi, a seminal figure in the field of economic anthropology, argued that at the time Smith was primarily describing a period of organization of production along commercial lines. For Polanyi, capitalism is distinguishable from earlier mercantilist and commercial eras by the commodification of land, labour-power,and money. It appeared in mature form as a result of the problems raised when an industrial factory system requiring long-term investment and entailing corresponding risks was introduced into an internationalized commercial framework. Historically speaking, the most pressing needs of this new system were an assured supply of the elements of industry- land, elaborate machinery, and labour, and these imperatives led to the afforementioned commodification; not through a process of self-organizing activity, but rather as a result of deliberate, often forceful, state intervention. (see Karl Polanyi, The Great Transformation)\n\nMany of these theories call attention to various economic practices that became institutionalized in Europe between the 16th and 19th centuries, especially involving the right of individuals and groups of individuals acting as "legal persons" (or corporations) to buy and sell capital goods, as well as land, labor, and money (see finance and credit), in a free market (see trade), and relying on the state for the enforcement of private property rights rather than on a system of feudal protection and obligations.
1129371
I believe that the term nouveau riche became prevalent in the late 1800s. Used in conjuncrtion with people from the US as the went to France on holiday, as opposed to the older moneyed people from Europe.
169687
Too early for the Rennaisance. Look at the effects of the Bubonic Plague (1348-1352) on the production of food per person, specifically in Britain. This increase in "income" allowed resources to be allocated to the production of capital goods and the development of new technologies.
80400
I don't believe that there ever was some golden age on the earth, except in the mind of some mythologist or visionary. Based on that, i would say the same era i was born in, the latter half of the 20th century, the nuclear era, the modern/postmodern era.
640087
It went through a tremendous transformation.  The lies of constant production resulting in needed constant obsolescence were largely developed then.  "A healthy economy" became defined as the rich getting richer.\n\nEngland and Europe ended owing American huge war debts and since their infrastructure was largely damaged Americans could sell almost anything they produced for several years after the war.
922552
Notable ideas: tabula rasa, "government with the consent of the governed"; state of nature; rights of life, liberty and property \nInfluences: Plato, Aristotle, Aquinas, Grotius, Descartes, Hooker, Hobbes
527498
Hi,\nFresh ideas keep the world of economics from stagnating. No one likes to get stuck in a rut and when a new idea or method is proposed, the old ones must adapt to keep up with improvments or, get left behind.
121338
Sompe people who check this category have extensive knowledge of it, or can find it online, but you should be more specific. Is there anything in particular that interests you?\nEnlightment was a period where new ideas affected areas as diverse as literature and clothing. Do you need the socio-economic aspects? The political climate? The attitude to marriage? Sorry, that topic is too broad.
1031335
It is almost a paradox that Marx's earlier writings, from around 1840-50, were more prophetic than his later writings, such as Das Kapital, 1867.  These earlier writings are extremely well thought out and contain many of the theses by which Marx will begin to identify historical events as proof for what he thought.  In Das Kapital, of course, Marx believed that capitalism would quickly collapse under its own weight.  Perhaps he was rushing things a bit.\nHowever it was in the earlier writings where Marx perhaps learned from his anti-Hegelian stance.  nevertheless, he used the dialectic method of Hegel and would often say that hegel had things upside down.  He owed a lot to the great man who died in 1831, I think. \nThe early writings, the result of his outgrowing The Essence of Christianity's materialism (Feuerbach) talk about the efforts of the naturally alienated aristocracy to rid themselves of the middle class.  The middle class, no longer assured of survival, would then rise up and achieve control, turning government into a perfect democracy.  Marx uses the word "democracy" with great ease and equates it with his concept of communism.  This is interesting stuff, especially "The Poverty of Philosophy" in which he notes the limitations of philosophy to be able to make any real change! Also read "The Jewish Question."\nMarx's dream almost came about in the European revolutions of 1848.  It was that year that he published the Communist Manifesto with Engels.  (Somehow I doubt whether Engels wrote much of anything in this or later works for which he received credit, but I may be wrong.)\n\nHowever the revolution was put down, country by country and things settled down to pretty much the same way things had been, except that this was probably the early origins of various Europeans pushing each other around a bit.  \nMarx kept writing these idealized articles, centered around the recognition of equality of all peoples and the use in history of the Hegelian dialectic.  Marx was kicked out of Prussia, France and Belgium, I think, and went to England.  After 1850, Marx took a decidedly different turn: he began to use historical records to prove the truth of what he was espousing.  In writing Das Kapital, Marx put the final touches on all the historical reasons as to how and why Capitalism would collapse and the workers woud rise up in unison and share the wealth fairly for the first time.  Das Kapital is an exceedingly boring book except to scholars who have nothing else to do.  Marx essentially let his family starve in order to write it.  I seem to recall he even used the American Civil War as a precedent for the fall of capitalism.  He was much better at philosphical theory than he was at interpreting historical events.\nUltimately, one might say that Marx might be partially vindicated as we begin to have a one world economy.  As the United States exports more and more of its manufacturing and middle class jobs, the middle class is eroding at an alarming rate.  Marx believed that there was a limited supply of capital and he may have been right.  However if one views the Mexicans (et al) who come across the border to work as nothing much more than slave labor, that shows that the world has a bit more cheap labor it will exploit before the great revolution.\nIf there is one thing that Marx understood concerning economic principles, it was that the three parts of economics consisted of production, distribution and consumption.  It was Marx who pinpointed the crux of the difficulty in this as distribution.\nOne can say what one wants about his later explanations of history.. and he was clearly mistaken about so many instances he tried to use....those early writings are just as sharp and clear and on the mark as any philosophical writings since Hegel.
694899
MEDIEVAL ECONOMICS\n\nThe people of the former Roman province of Britain in the 5th and 6th Centuries had to make their living in difficult circumstances. Around them lay the ruins of imperial grandeur. In the cities, public buildings and private houses were in decay; on the frontiers, the forts were abandoned; in the country, the aristocratic villas were crumbling. This was not just a matter of physical decline or political change because as the Roman state was dismantled, so roads, bridges and ports were neglected, the coinage disappeared, government spending ceased and the elite of the armed forces and civil administration were no longer employing labor or consuming goods on a large scale. Trade dwindled and the former mass-producing industries collapsed. The native British population faced major upheavals in their way of life, including unemployment and a breakdown in law and order. The German immigrants from across the North Sea, who had been attracted by the opulence of the province, had to adapt to a changing society. \n\nWithout trade, easy communications or imperial government, the cities could not provide a living for a large population and almost everyone lived in the countryside. Here again they had no alternative but to adapt to a restricted economy. Apart from problems of security there would be no more large surpluses to be sold in the towns. The villas were taken over by succeeding generations of native British or Anglo-Saxon immigrants who put up buildings of wood. In some cases the territory around the villa persisted as an estate unit and the owners obtained tribute from the local peasants. \n\nThe priority of country-dwellers lay in providing for their own subsistence. In southern and eastern England they lived in timber houses often measuring 15 by 30 feet, associated with smaller structures with sunken floors built for storage, craft work (such as weaving) and accomodations for servants and dependants. \n\nEven in the reduced circumstances of the post-Roman recession, households could not meet all of their consumption requirements from their own resources. They wove their own cloth and no doubt built their own houses and made implements from wood. But they needed iron weapons and farming tools and women wore ornate jewelry manufactured from copper alloy. These could only be supplied by specialists with crfating skills and raw materials so some surpluses from the land were exchanged. \n\nA society with an emphasis on production for use and which had limited facilities for exchange was not likely to be deeply stratified. Elites collected foodstuffs from the peasants in some form but they had limited ways of disposing of goods once they satisfied their followers. While the people of 5th and 6th Century England adapted successfully to their post-imperial world, this was still a traumatic process. The losses of population far outweighed the gains from migration partly as a result of plague epidemics in the 6th Century, but more as uncertainties and the lack of economic opportunity discouraged marriage and child-rearing. We can only make an educated guess at the overall figures but the sparsity of settlements, the abandonment of towns and the retreat of cultivation could point to at least halving the population. Thus numbers fell from a peak of perhaps 5 million in the 2nd Century to less than 2 million by 600 AD.
103122
Most countries have adopted supply side economics for cetain periods - example during Prez Reagan's time (USA), Austria and UK (following Keyne's findings that public investment helped reduce inflation).\n\nSupply-side economics developed during the 1970s of the Keynesian dominance of economic policy, and in particular the failue of demand management to stabilise Western economies in the stagflation of the 1970s, in the wake of the oil crisis in 1973. [1] (Case & Fair, 1999: 780).\n\nIt drew on a range of non-Keynesian economic thought, particularly the Austrian school, e.g. Joseph Schumpeter and monetarism.
1028232
The Golden Age trilogy by John C. Wright\n\nHe's a newer sci fi writer writing about the far distant future of humanity. Interesting, intellectually challenging books. The link below is for the first book.
90332
Hmm, does someone have a politcal theory midterm coming up?\n\nKant was largely a predecessor to Marx/Engels and was critisizing the same social structures they work and their inevitable ends of ruin. \n\nMachiavelli on the other hand was an advocate of the totalitarian ideal. Force makes right, but the quite "The ends justifies the means.", in itself is not correct. Even Niccolo would not entirely agree with that. \n\nTheir deep philophies are much to deep to get into because they were largely addressing different periods in political history.  Machiavelli was witnessing Roman decline and revolution, while Kant was witnessing the rise of the industrial revolution and its impacts upon the masses. \n\nIs there a specific topic you were intrested in like free will? social revolution or something?