Glücksspiel oder ökonomisches Werturteil mit Folgen?

Felix Schroeter
{"title":"Glücksspiel oder ökonomisches Werturteil mit Folgen?","authors":"Felix Schroeter","doi":"10.1515/jbwg-2022-0006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Despite his prominence in the socio-political debate on the German housing market before the First World War, Rudolph Eberstadt’s (1856-1922) concept of speculation is largely ignored today by German scholars of economics and economic history. Accordingly, speculative operations on markets are seen rather to determine economic values than to merely assess them. Through the channel of the prevailing institutions of credit and property, they determine future values as well as the modalities of how the real economy will produce their corresponding equivalents. Eberstadt’s conceptual works on the general notion of speculation rely on his institutional-economic investigation of the housing market in metropolitan areas. He conceives loan-financed speculative deals as a legally backed instrument of redistribution, which serves the private sector to realize capital gains from mere value assessments. His approach critically highlights the normative power of financial liabilities from a politicoeconomic perspective. The severe criticism that this approach evoked on the part of market-liberal economists may explain why academics largely ignore Eberstadt’s insights today.","PeriodicalId":195429,"journal":{"name":"Jahrbuch für Wirtschaftsgeschichte / Economic History Yearbook","volume":"C-28 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jahrbuch für Wirtschaftsgeschichte / Economic History Yearbook","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/jbwg-2022-0006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Despite his prominence in the socio-political debate on the German housing market before the First World War, Rudolph Eberstadt’s (1856-1922) concept of speculation is largely ignored today by German scholars of economics and economic history. Accordingly, speculative operations on markets are seen rather to determine economic values than to merely assess them. Through the channel of the prevailing institutions of credit and property, they determine future values as well as the modalities of how the real economy will produce their corresponding equivalents. Eberstadt’s conceptual works on the general notion of speculation rely on his institutional-economic investigation of the housing market in metropolitan areas. He conceives loan-financed speculative deals as a legally backed instrument of redistribution, which serves the private sector to realize capital gains from mere value assessments. His approach critically highlights the normative power of financial liabilities from a politicoeconomic perspective. The severe criticism that this approach evoked on the part of market-liberal economists may explain why academics largely ignore Eberstadt’s insights today.
那么是什么造成的呢?
尽管鲁道夫·埃伯施塔特(Rudolph Eberstadt, 1856-1922)在第一次世界大战前关于德国房地产市场的社会政治辩论中占有重要地位,但他的投机概念在很大程度上被德国经济学和经济史学者所忽视。因此,市场上的投机操作被视为决定经济价值,而不仅仅是评估经济价值。通过主流信贷和财产机构的渠道,它们决定了未来的价值,以及实体经济如何产生相应等价物的模式。埃伯施塔特关于投机的一般概念的概念性著作依赖于他对大都市地区住房市场的制度经济调查。他认为,贷款融资的投机交易是一种有法律支持的再分配工具,服务于私营部门,使其从单纯的价值评估中实现资本收益。他的方法从政治经济角度批判性地强调了金融负债的规范性力量。这种方法引起了市场自由主义经济学家的严厉批评,这或许可以解释为什么今天的学术界在很大程度上忽视了埃伯施塔特的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信