Adósság, pénz és szabadság = Taxation, money and freedom

A tanulmány a Déltengeri Társasággal foglalkozó tanulmány folytatása (Madarász [2011]). A 18. századi brit államadósság szerepéről és kezeléséről szóló modern gazdaságtörténeti értékelések áttekintése után a tanulmány részletesen bemutatja Davenant, Defoe, Bolingbroke, Hume, Wallace, Pinto, Steuart és Smith érvelését a \"közhitel\" lehetséges és szükségszerű gazdasági és politikai hatásairól, a háborús kiadások fedezésének módjairól. Részletesebben tárgyalja Hume és Smith álláspontját a papírpénz és a bankok szerepéről, a pénzmennyiség változásának következményeiről és a skóciai \"szabad\" bankrendszer jellemzőiről. A vita egyik oldalán a közhitelt szükséges, ám veszélyes eszköznek tekintették, amely válságba sodorhatja az országot, és aláássa a politikai szabadságot, a másik vélemény szerint a kereskedő állam adóssága szükséges és előnyös, ösztönzi a gazdaság fejlődését, és kifejezi a polgárok bizalmát a kormányzat iránt. / === / The study, following on from the author s previous work on the history of South Sea Company, focuses on the issue of public debt in 18th-century British economic writings. The first part reviews recent debates among economic historians: how to explain the growing credibility of British governments after 1689. The next details the arguments of some important protagonists in the early modern age - Davenant, Defoe, Bolingbroke, Hume, Wallace, Pinto, Steuart and Smith - on the expected economic and political consequences of an increasing public debt and on the methods of financing wars. This is followed by discussion of the monetary theories of Hume and Smith, notably their views on banks, credit, paper money, the effects of increasing money supply, and the features of free\" Scottish banking system. Two main lines of argument were advanced in the controversies on public debt. Several writers regarded it as a necessary but dangerous instrument that undermines political liberty and can lead the state into financial bankruptcy. Others described it as not only necessary, but advantageous to a commercial nation, by stimulating trade and development and symbolizing the public s confidence in their government.

Post Crisis Lessons for Open Economies: Are They All New?

This paper will argue that the American economy could and will absorb the recent shocks, and that in the longer run (within a matter of years), it will somehow convert the revealed weaknesses to its advantage. America has a long record of learning from its excesses to improve the working of its particular brand of capitalism, dating back to the imposition of antitrust controls on the robber barons in the late 1800s and the enhancement of investor protection after the 1929 crash. The American economy has experienced market imperfections of all kinds but it almost always has found, true, not perfect, but fairly reliable regulatory answers and has managed to adapt to change, (e. g. Dodd-Frank Act on financial stability). The U.S. has many times pioneered in the elaboration of both theoretical and policy oriented solutions for conflicts between markets and government to increase economic welfare (Bernanke, 2008, p. 425). There is no single reason why it should not turn the latest financial calamities to its advantage. At the same time, to regain confidence in capitalism as a global system, global efforts are indispensable. To identify some of the global economic conflicts that have a lot to do with U.S. markets in particular, we seek answers to global systemic questions.

Challenges the finance profession has been facing following the 2008-2009. A multi-country research

In the successful strategic management of the modern companies each function plays their specific role. While today’s businesses in many ways are different from their ancestors, the key fundamentals are derived from the same roots. Their main purpose of existence is to serve the needs of their shareholders and stakeholders by creating value (Pike et al., 1993). To achieve this effectively and efficiently the various functions need to work in close cooperation with each other. The global crisis, starting in 2008, proved that volatility is higher for the financial markets and the ordinary businesses that have been anticipated before. As the recession started as a financial crisis many people started to blame – amongst others – banks and financial institutions for excessive risk taking and taking short profits ahead of long term sustainable growth. Accordingly the lost confidence in the financial institutions has taken a toll on the reputation of other Finance professionals such as accountants, book keepers, treasury, tax people and others. The finance function’s strategic importance is linked to its ability to help interpreting the business performance and provide transparency. In order to restore the trust the finance profession is now facing one of the biggest challenges of its history, the need to reinvent itself. This paper presents the findings of a recent international research conducted in the United Kingdom, France, Hungary and Poland interviewing 169 executives of the business sector plus the review of 237 job descriptions of finance professionals in order to understand the challenges of the modern finance function. The findings of the study could provide relevant answers and help to overcome a very current problem that Finance is facing today, how to rebuild reputation and to stay a trusted partner and enabler for long term business strategy.