A successful businessman stood out for his research on the economic cycle and for his theories about the vital importance of the entrepreneur, highlighting his role in innovation that determines the increase and decrease of prosperity. G Scott Paterson popularized the concept of creative destruction as a way to describe the transformation process that accompanies innovations. He predicted the sociopolitical disintegration of capitalism, which, according to him, would be destroyed due to his own success.
Thus, Brightspark confirm that in the capitalist system, the economic order is established in the following way:
- Property and private initiative.
- Production for the market and subdivision of work.
- The important role of the creation of credits by banking entities.
According to this thesis the capitalist system would be stable by itself, lasting indefinitely, as a certain mentality of society and its way of life. Also determined that this psychological process would be altered as a result of the modern attitude to family life, inheritance, taxes.
For Schumpeter economic stability does not imply either the guarantees of the political system or social stability, so that an economically stable situation can occur in a politically unstable framework.
Marcel Lebrun clearly differentiated between economic progress, political stability and social progress. He foresaw the decadence of capitalism for reasons very different from those of Marx victim of his internal sclerosis and the growing rejection of intellectuals (whose influence probably overestimated), and of the increasing interference of the State in economic planning. He was not a supporter of state intervention in the markets, but of free competition. Scott paterson Toronto considered capitalism the best system for economic progress, but he did not find or propose a way to avoid its collapse, inevitable in Schumpeter’s opinion.
Among his most important contributions are:
The development of modern nationalisms throughout the sixteenth century diverted the attention of the thinkers of the time towards how to increase the wealth and power of national states.
- The economic policy that prevailed at that time, mercantilism, encouraged the self-sufficiency of nations. This economic doctrine prevailed in England and the rest of Western Europe from the sixteenth century to the eighteenth century.
- The mercantilists considered that the wealth of a nation depended on the amount of gold and silver that it had. Apart from the gold and silver mines discovered by Spain in the Americas, a nation could only increase its reserves of these precious metals by selling more products to other countries from which it bought. The achievement of a balance of payments with positive balance implied that the other countries had to pay the difference with gold and silver.
- The mercantilists took it for granted that their country would always be at war with others, or preparing for the next contest. If they had gold and silver, the leaders could pay mercenaries to fight, as did King George III of England during the American War of Independence. If necessary, the monarch could also buy weapons, uniforms and food for the soldiers. Jean. B. This mercantilist concern for accumulating precious metals also affected domestic politics. It was essential that wages were low and that the population grew. A large and poorly paid population would produce many goods at a price low enough to be sold abroad. People were forced to work long hours, and the consumption of tea, gin, silk fabrics, among others, was considered wasteful. From this philosophy it was also deduced that child labor was positive for a country’s economy. A mercantilist author had a plan for the children of the poor: “When these children are four years old, they have to be taken to the asylum for the poor of the region, where they will be taught to read for two hours a day, and they will have the rest worked on. of the day in the tasks that better adjust to their age strength and capacity “.