Preskoči na sadržaj
Korištenjem servisa na Twitteru pristajete na korištenje kolačića. Twitter i partneri rade globalno te koriste kolačiće za analize, personalizaciju i oglase.

Za najbolje sučelje na Twitteru koristite Microsoft Edge ili instalirajte aplikaciju Twitter iz trgovine Microsoft Store.

  • Naslovnica Naslovnica Naslovnica, trenutna stranica.
  • O Twitteru

Spremljena pretraživanja

  • obriši
  • U ovom razgovoru
    Ovjeren akauntZaštićeni tweetovi @
Predloženi korisnici
  • Ovjeren akauntZaštićeni tweetovi @
  • Ovjeren akauntZaštićeni tweetovi @
  • Jezik: Hrvatski
    • Bahasa Indonesia
    • Bahasa Melayu
    • Català
    • Čeština
    • Dansk
    • Deutsch
    • English
    • English UK
    • Español
    • Filipino
    • Français
    • Italiano
    • Magyar
    • Nederlands
    • Norsk
    • Polski
    • Português
    • Română
    • Slovenčina
    • Suomi
    • Svenska
    • Tiếng Việt
    • Türkçe
    • Български език
    • Русский
    • Српски
    • Українська мова
    • Ελληνικά
    • עִבְרִית
    • العربية
    • فارسی
    • मराठी
    • हिन्दी
    • বাংলা
    • ગુજરાતી
    • தமிழ்
    • ಕನ್ನಡ
    • ภาษาไทย
    • 한국어
    • 日本語
    • 简体中文
    • 繁體中文
  • Imate račun? Prijava
    Imate račun?
    · Zaboravili ste lozinku?

    Novi ste na Twitteru?
    Registrirajte se
Profil korisnika/ce pseudoerasmus
Pseudoerasmus
Pseudoerasmus
Pseudoerasmus
@pseudoerasmus

Tweets

Pseudoerasmus

@pseudoerasmus

Economic history & comparative development 🚫 NO current events in this feed ⚠️ Economic history ≠ history of economic thought. In love with @_alice_evans 💞

pseudoerasmus.com
Vrijeme pridruživanja: kolovoz 2011.

Tweets

  • © 2020 Twitter
  • O Twitteru
  • Centar za pomoć
  • Uvjeti
  • Pravila o privatnosti
  • Imprint
  • Kolačići
  • Informacije o oglasima
Odbaci
Prethodni
Sljedeće

Idite na profil osobe

Spremljena pretraživanja

  • obriši
  • U ovom razgovoru
    Ovjeren akauntZaštićeni tweetovi @
Predloženi korisnici
  • Ovjeren akauntZaštićeni tweetovi @
  • Ovjeren akauntZaštićeni tweetovi @

Odjava

Blokiraj

  • Objavi Tweet s lokacijom

    U tweetove putem weba ili aplikacija drugih proizvođača možete dodati podatke o lokaciji, kao što su grad ili točna lokacija. Povijest lokacija tweetova uvijek možete izbrisati. Saznajte više

    Vaši popisi

    Izradi novi popis


    Manje od 100 znakova, neobavezno

    Privatnost

    Kopiraj vezu u tweet

    Ugradi ovaj Tweet

    Embed this Video

    Dodajte ovaj Tweet na svoje web-mjesto kopiranjem koda u nastavku. Saznajte više

    Dodajte ovaj videozapis na svoje web-mjesto kopiranjem koda u nastavku. Saznajte više

    Hm, došlo je do problema prilikom povezivanja s poslužiteljem.

    Integracijom Twitterova sadržaja u svoje web-mjesto ili aplikaciju prihvaćate Twitterov Ugovor za programere i Pravila za programere.

    Pregled

    Razlog prikaza oglasa

    Prijavi se na Twitter

    · Zaboravili ste lozinku?
    Nemate račun? Registrirajte se »

    Prijavite se na Twitter

    Niste na Twitteru? Registrirajte se, uključite se u stvari koje vas zanimaju, i dobivajte promjene čim se dogode.

    Registrirajte se
    Imate račun? Prijava »

    Dvosmjerni (slanje i primanje) kratki kodovi:

    Država Kod Samo za korisnike
    Sjedinjene Američke Države 40404 (bilo koje)
    Kanada 21212 (bilo koje)
    Ujedinjeno Kraljevstvo 86444 Vodafone, Orange, 3, O2
    Brazil 40404 Nextel, TIM
    Haiti 40404 Digicel, Voila
    Irska 51210 Vodafone, O2
    Indija 53000 Bharti Airtel, Videocon, Reliance
    Indonezija 89887 AXIS, 3, Telkomsel, Indosat, XL Axiata
    Italija 4880804 Wind
    3424486444 Vodafone
    » Pogledajte SMS kratke šifre za druge zemlje

    Potvrda

     

    Dobro došli kući!

    Vremenska crta mjesto je na kojem ćete provesti najviše vremena i bez odgode dobivati novosti o svemu što vam je važno.

    Tweetovi vam ne valjaju?

    Prijeđite pokazivačem preko slike profila pa kliknite gumb Pratim da biste prestali pratiti neki račun.

    Kažite mnogo uz malo riječi

    Kada vidite Tweet koji volite, dodirnite srce – to osobi koja ga je napisala daje do znanja da vam se sviđa.

    Proširite glas

    Najbolji je način da podijelite nečiji Tweet s osobama koje vas prate prosljeđivanje. Dodirnite ikonu da biste smjesta poslali.

    Pridruži se razgovoru

    Pomoću odgovora dodajte sve što mislite o nekom tweetu. Pronađite temu koja vam je važna i uključite se.

    Saznajte najnovije vijesti

    Bez odgode pogledajte o čemu ljudi razgovaraju.

    Pratite više onoga što vam se sviđa

    Pratite više računa da biste dobivali novosti o temama do kojih vam je stalo.

    Saznajte što se događa

    Bez odgode pogledajte najnovije razgovore o bilo kojoj temi.

    Ne propustite nijedan aktualni događaj

    Bez odgode pratite kako se razvijaju događaji koje pratite.

    1. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. lis 2019.
      • Prijavi Tweet

      Pseudoerasmus je proslijedio/a tweet korisnika/ceLewis Defrates

      I've now read the paper by Link & @NMaggor forthcoming in Past & Present, "The United States as a Developing Nation: Revisiting the Peculiarities of American History". Ofc I have some criticisms! but it's very interesting & you should read it (why the no-working-paper norm???)https://twitter.com/lewisdefrates/status/1184175893603856384 …

      Pseudoerasmus je dodan/na,

      Lewis Defrates @lewisdefrates
      The @camericanist podcast is continuing this year! Recorded in a studio with a revolving cast of guest hosts from our PhD cohort. This week Rob Bates talks to Stefan Link and @NMaggor on histories of American development. Listen here and on iTunes etc. https://soundcloud.com/cahspodcast/maggor-link-interview-141019 …
      39 proslijeđenih tweetova 127 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
      Prikaži ovu nit
    2. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. lis 2019.
      • Prijavi Tweet

      Paper engages with the work of economic historians but its intended primary audience is other Americanist historians (of capitalism?); aims to 'provincialise' US economic development, situates the USA as part of the global agrarian periphery

      4 proslijeđena tweeta 24 korisnika označavaju da im se sviđa
      Prikaži ovu nit
    3. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. lis 2019.
      • Prijavi Tweet

      Although it doesn't cite the book, the paper implicitly says, "There should have been a USA chapter in Williamson's Trade & Poverty", which was about why The Rest was turned into an agricultural 'periphery' and Western Europe into the industrial core during 19th c. globalisation

      1 reply 4 proslijeđena tweeta 18 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
      Prikaži ovu nit
    4. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. lis 2019.
      • Prijavi Tweet

      The L & M paper is somewhat close in spirit to Allen's "American Exceptionalism as a Problem in Global Economic History" which argues that the USA was a primary exporter experiencing Dutch Disease so how did it escape the fate of the periphery? https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f3a1/b15c9c9e8f721bda64369f7953d2a98b2610.pdf …

      7 proslijeđenih tweetova 28 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
      Prikaži ovu nit
    5. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. lis 2019.
      • Prijavi Tweet

      When I have complained about claims by historians of capitalism that slave cotton was central to US econ development, it is PRECISELY in global comparative perspective that the claim is incongruous. Cotton made the US South a part of the global agrarian periphery and....

      1 reply 11 proslijeđenih tweetova 31 korisnik označava da mu se sviđa
      Prikaži ovu nit
    6. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. lis 2019.
      • Prijavi Tweet

      Agricultural specialisation has normally prevented or retarded industrialisation elsewhere. Yet somehow, in the unique and exceptional case of the USA, being a primary exporter was good for industrialisation???

      12 proslijeđenih tweetova 35 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
      Prikaži ovu nit
    7. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. lis 2019.
      • Prijavi Tweet

      ( This incongruity exists outside HOC, of course. Natural resources are largely thought a curse, but people try to explain the exceptions like Botswana, or in the EH context, Gavin Wright with the USA, and McLean with Australia, etc. )

      4 proslijeđena tweeta 11 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
      Prikaži ovu nit
    8. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. lis 2019.
      • Prijavi Tweet

      And of course Argentine historians have obsessed over why Argentina did not develop like Australia - New Zealand -- Canada. But I think Link & Maggor have a more interesting motivating comparison: the USA in many respects is more profitably contrasted with Argentina.

      5 proslijeđenih tweetova 30 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
      Prikaži ovu nit
    9. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. lis 2019.
      • Prijavi Tweet

      Most of the paper is historiographical -- criticising the provincialism of previous explanations of US industrialisation -- but the last section touches on their hypothesis, 'developmental state' at the state level, not the federal level

      3 proslijeđena tweeta 15 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
      Prikaži ovu nit
    10. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. lis 2019.
      • Prijavi Tweet

      Naturally I will air my criticisms of the paper when it finally appears....

      2 proslijeđena tweeta 6 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
      Prikaži ovu nit
      Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
      • Prijavi Tweet

      The paper discussed above is finally out and it's open access. Some comments from me. https://academic.oup.com/past/advance-article/doi/10.1093/pastj/gtz032/5686413 …pic.twitter.com/nvHU6Yr7AE

      06:26 - 31. pro 2019.
      • 19 proslijeđenih tweetova
      • 59 oznaka „sviđa mi se”
      • Joshua Howard Albert Pinto Inbfor Carlos Ortega Leon T Claudio I. Remeseira Mighty.Johannon Micheál Reilly 🇮🇪🇪🇺 psodot
      19 proslijeđenih tweetova 59 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
        1. Novi razgovor
        2. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          Once again I applaud the effort to ‘provincialise’ US economic history & situate it in global comparative perspective. I particularly liked the motivating comparison of the USA & Argentina which you don't see much of. Normally Argentina is compared with Australia and New Zealand.

          1 reply 2 proslijeđena tweeta 21 korisnik označava da mu se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        3. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          But is Argentina the best comparison? Because surely the developmental experience most comparable with the USA’s was Canada’s and Australia’s. The latter two did not even become industrial exporters, but industrialised nevertheless!

          2 proslijeđena tweeta 19 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        4. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          Pre-revolutionary Russia (as a 'failed' case) is another frontier economy with natural resources one might have profitably compared the USA with. Russia is also more populous than the other non-USA frontier economies, and also has a history of unfree labour.

          1 reply 2 proslijeđena tweeta 12 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        5. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          Link & Maggor want to conceptualise the “American developmental state” along the lines of the “East Asian developmental state” on which there is so much literature in political economy of development.

          1 reply 2 proslijeđena tweeta 8 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        6. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          L&M (correctly) see the USA as a primary exporter in the 19th century and therefore as part of the global agrarian periphery. So the problem is how the USA escaped this role as the supplier of cash crops in the global division of labour, unlike China or India in the 19th century

          1 reply 3 proslijeđena tweeta 14 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        7. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          But I see some problems with this conceptualisation.

          1 reply 2 proslijeđena tweeta 5 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        8. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          (1) When it comes to East Asia, one can make several definitive observations: (a) at the beginning of the ‘developmental’ period, East Asia lacked the manufacturing knowledge to make industrial goods for the world market;

          1 reply 2 proslijeđena tweeta 10 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        9. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          (b) at the beginning of the period, they also lacked skilled workers; (c) the very low wages did not compensate for the low productivity when they began the industrialisation process;

          1 reply 2 proslijeđena tweeta 9 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        10. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          but eventually (d) East Asian countries converged with the rich countries by acquiring / learning / developing technical processes, and raising productivity levels

          1 reply 2 proslijeđena tweeta 12 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        11. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          **** BUT BUT BUT **** (2) US manufacturing *may* have *always* been as productive as British manufacturing from the early 19th century. There’s some evidence that perhaps it was even *more* productive than the UK early on. Evidence on this is not completely conclusive but...

          1 reply 3 proslijeđena tweeta 15 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        12. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          And the USA seems to have always had as much technical knowledge and skilled labour as the UK — and possibly more, since universal schooling came earlier to the USA than the UK.

          1 reply 3 proslijeđena tweeta 20 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        13. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          *** VERY IMPORTANT *** What made Britain competitive in the 19th century (vis-à-vis the USA) was that its labour and raw material costs were low!!! and American labour & raw material costs were too high!

          1 reply 6 proslijeđenih tweetova 27 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        14. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          { This is of course well known and one might even say obvious from the Habakkuk debate. }

          1 reply 2 proslijeđena tweeta 13 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        15. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          Today we associate low labour costs with the less industrialised country, but in the 19th c. the USA was the high wage yet less industrialised country and the UK the low wage but more industrialised country. (The UK was the high wage country compared with the rest of the world.)

          1 reply 8 proslijeđenih tweetova 31 korisnik označava da mu se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        16. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          naturally, this is the precise opposite of the East Asia pattern described earlier.

          1 reply 2 proslijeđena tweeta 10 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        17. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          (3) In such a situation, is there really a puzzle of US industrialisation, as Link and Maggor claim? As long as tariffs and/or physical distance raised the price of British goods, it was profitable to manufacture industrial goods in America.

          1 reply 3 proslijeđena tweeta 20 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        18. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          If American geography and/or American federal commercial policy prevented cheap-labour British industry from wiping out expensive-labour American industries, what's exactly the puzzle?

          1 reply 4 proslijeđena tweeta 18 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        19. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          Link & Maggor mention tariffs just once in their paper, in order to say Latin America also used tariffs, but did not industrialise as rapidly as the USA. But LA also lacked mechanics, engineers, & other skilled workers compared with the USA. Didn't have as much as schooling early

          4 proslijeđena tweeta 18 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        20. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          By all means, do perform an analysis of the political economy of the traditionally identified policies promoting US industrialisation — tariffs, education, infrastructure, transportation, resource exploitation, territorial expansion, and banking. (

          1 reply 1 proslijeđeni tweet 11 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        21. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          { although US banking was primitive and ‘backward’ till the 20th century, by European standards. }

          1 reply 2 proslijeđena tweeta 11 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        22. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          But I don’t think there is anything particuarly puzzling about the USA when it comes to the political economy of those policies? The European catch-up industrialisers did the same thing, except for the US-specific frontier-relevant policies (expansion/immigration/settlement).

          1 reply 2 proslijeđena tweeta 10 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        23. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          (5) I’m also sceptical that talking about an “American developmental state” in the same vein as the East Asian developmental state is particularly useful (NB: DeLong and Cohen have made the same comparison )

          3 proslijeđena tweeta 10 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        24. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          EAsia had an industrial planning bureaucracy picking industries to move into & creating domestic supply chains; forcing companies to meet export targets; financial repress to suppress consumption & raise investment; & controlled foreign investment to maximise technical knowledge

          1 reply 1 proslijeđeni tweet 16 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        25. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          YET there was NOTHING like that in the USA during the 19th century!

          1 reply 1 proslijeđeni tweet 11 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        26. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          Interestingly, Link & Maggor argue that individual American states acted as mini developmental states. In fact that’s their novel contribution. In some parts of their paper, they come close to arguing each state pursued its own industrial policy with regard to ‘domestic’ firms!!

          1 reply 3 proslijeđena tweeta 24 korisnika označavaju da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        27. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          They do actually state explicitly that the State of Michigan“state policies tipped the scale in favour of local producers”. But the point is not elaborated — I suppose that’s their research for the future!

          1 proslijeđeni tweet 17 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        28. Pseudoerasmus‏ @pseudoerasmus 31. pro 2019.
          • Prijavi Tweet

          Pseudoerasmus je proslijedio/a tweet korisnika/cePseudoerasmus

          NB: I'm deliberately avoiding the tariffs-&-US-industrialisation debate. I mention them only because Link & Maggor barely do!! (W/o tariffs the USA might have specialised in very different industries from the UK & industrialised nevertheless. Or maybe not)https://twitter.com/pseudoerasmus/status/1212023284595904519 …

          Pseudoerasmus je dodan/na,

          Pseudoerasmus @pseudoerasmus
          (3) In such a situation, is there really a puzzle of US industrialisation, as Link and Maggor claim? As long as tariffs and/or physical distance raised the price of British goods, it was profitable to manufacture industrial goods in America.
          Prikaži ovu nit
          1 proslijeđeni tweet 12 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
          Prikaži ovu nit
        29. Kraj razgovora

      Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.

      Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.

        Sponzorirani tweet

        false

        • © 2020 Twitter
        • O Twitteru
        • Centar za pomoć
        • Uvjeti
        • Pravila o privatnosti
        • Imprint
        • Kolačići
        • Informacije o oglasima