This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
there is no information about his first university. Does somebody know?--80.91.145.193 13:51, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
Vienna if you mean as a student (that was actually his only school); Czernowicz for teaching. Clossius 14:52, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
History of Economic Analysis
More emphasis needs to be put on how formidable the amount research he did when working on this book. He included, and critically analyzed, nearly every significat economist in history. Schumpeter even discovered a few economists whose early insights were overlooked and basically demonstrated an understanding and historical perspective of nearly every economist. Quadzilla99 11:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
Biased
I think this article is biased. It attempts to make out Schumpeter was ultimately a "free market economist". Even his sympathy for Marx - by whom he is obviously influenced - is passed off as a "masquerade". Why can't we have an article about the man himself not just about the way some of his ideas have been cannibalised (or salvaged) to serve the orthodoxy???--Jack Upland 08:26, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
Jack Upland, I'd have to disagree there. Schumpeter was very explicitly a classical liberal. I don't have the exact quote but he did say, when predicting the death of capitalism, that "just because the Doctor predicts the patient's death does not mean he wants the patient to die." Second, the idea that his ideas are being "cannibalised" or "salvaged" to serve "the orthodoxy" is completely untrue; the orthodoxy in economics these days is for a mixed economy of varying degrees rather than for laissez-faire free markets.
Personal Life
I just heard an interview this week given by Thom McCraw, his book being a stated reference. This prompted me to read this article. I believe that this article requires more information on his personal life considering how interesting it is in its own right.
Recently a biography written by his disciple Thomas Mcgraw has been published.This will provide many useful additional inputs.59.95.233.85 05:47, 8 July 2007 (UTC)Jitendra Desai
Publication date 1911
I changed the year of publication of one of his most important works (Theorie der wirtschaftlichen Entwicklung) to 1911, based on the arguements made in the following link.
http://eh.net/pipermail/hes/2004-January/001917.html213.154.235.29 14:37, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
underestimates his impact
(my first proper attempt to contribute, so rather than edit the entry I've commented here)
a. His impact on economics, sociology and business studies.
b. His success in his own life time. (the comment that he his prestige was low and he was a poor lecturer is simply wrong)
1.He was elected President of the American Economic Association in 1949, the most prestigious office in the country for an economist. (first foreigner to get the honour)
2. When Yale tried to headhunt him, and all 17 members of the economics department signed a letter urging him to stay, and 26 of his Graduate Students did the same.
3. He was rated very highly by graduate and undergraduate students in reports.(There is some disagreement on this when he was near the end of his career.)
4. His History of Economic Analysis received rave reviews from his peers. (as did CSD)
5. His speech to American Economic Association in 1948 received “A thunderous and prologed standing ovation.It was a spontaneous expression of respect and gratitiude…”(McCraw p 483)
6. On his death (while still an active faculty member) His Students and Colleagues took the very unsual step of dedicating a future issue of the Review of Economics and Statistics to him.
In 1983, at the centennial of both Schumpeter and the then-legendary John Maynard Keynes, Mr. Drucker wrote in Forbes that Schumpeter's centenary birthday would hardly be noticed. Yet "Schumpeter it is who will shape the thinking and inform the questions on economic theory and economy policy for the rest of this century, if not for the next 30 or 50 years." Today Schumpeter's emphasis on the crucial importance of entrepreneurship and "creative destruction" are now commonplaces. http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB113202508406497251.html?mod=2_1194_3
I totally agree with this. Someone wrote he influenced the 20th century, and then, another one comes deleting it claiming "dubious and without reference". I think this forgets the good faith principle of wikipedia. Schumpeter, after Keynes, is by far the most important economist of the XX century. The problem is that not many people know, and they think it's a lie. I also agree the article might have some bias towards "liberalism". --C9900 (talk) 16:08, 31 July 2008 (UTC)
An image on this page may be deleted
This is an automated message regarding an image used on this page. The image File:1schumpeter.jpg, found on Joseph Schumpeter, has been nominated for deletion because it does not meet Wikipedia image policy. Please see the image description page for more details. If this message was sent in error (that is, the image is not up for deletion, or was left on the wrong talk page), please contact this bot's operator. STBotI (talk) 17:55, 27 December 2008 (UTC)
Business Cycles
The section as currently written on business cycles is quite confusing. Did he, or did he not include Kuznet waves in his wave form? Here is the confusing passage:
Schumpeter suggested a model in which the four main cycles, Kondratiev (54 years), Kuznets (18 years), Juglar (9 years) and Kitchin (about 4 years) can be added together to form a composite waveform. (Actually there was considerable professional rivalry between Schumpeter and Kuznets. The wave form suggested here did not include the Kuznets Cycle simply because Schumpeter did not recognize it as a valid cycle[clarification needed]. See "Business Cycle" for further information.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.131.200.92 (talk) 16:23, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Confusing article title, apparently...
This article may be confusing or unclear to readers. Please help clarify the article; suggestions may be found on the talk page. (March 2009)
The title of the article is "Joseph Schumpter." How exactly would one clear away the logjam of confusion that convoluted title creates? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.15.65.176 (talk) 05:46, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
It's the article not the title!!!--Jack Upland (talk) 09:07, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
PHOTOS Needed
Are there any photos of Joseph Schumpeter that can be used? --Dagvidur 05.05.2010
There are some, yes. There were some pics of the street in Bonn named after him on Commons, and you can also find some on Google search as well (some of them must be public domain)This is the closest you can get on Commons, but there should exist some other free pics, as well. --Eisfbnore (talk) 13:03, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
I found one on Flickr, is it fine? A little low resolution, though. Eisfbnore (talk) 11:30, 23 June 2010 (UTC)
European Union's innovation program
"For instance, the European Union's innovation program, and its main development plan, the Lisbon Strategy, are influenced by Schumpeter."
It is hard to reconcile this assertion with Schumpeter's own disavowal of bureaucratized creativity which he argued would end capitalism by ending the genius (in the Latin sense) of the entrepreneur. I had along look at Schumpeter and the innovation deficit in Europe in my book (J. Harpur (2010) Innovation, Profit and the Common Good in Higher Education: The New Alchemy. Palgrave) concluding that ironically European policy makers had done precisely the opposite of what Schumpeter recommended.
JohnHarpur (talk) 21:49, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
Too many "probablies"
Too many sentences in this article use the word "probably", as in "He was probably the first...". Can we get a rewrite to eliminate this and preferably replace with references? Delmlsfan (talk) 01:41, 14 April 2012 (UTC)
more work needed
I just finished reading McCraw's book and made a few fairly minor changes here. Frankly, this article needs a LOT of work, and I don't have the time (plus the library book's overdue!). I've just changed the un-ref'd section about his professorial career, as well as the section which made him into a Marxist, instead of familiar with Marx's works and a critic of them.
I'm also pretty sure the section about the gold standard is just plain wrong, and a misquote from the cited book's explanation of the gold standard being one superceded mode of economic analysis, but again I don't have time to check the citation. Schumpeter started as a financier, and even served as Austria's finance minister during very tough times (caused as much by its military defeat in WWI and the stupidly onerous Treaty of Versailles). While Schumpeter vehemently disagreed with much of what Keynes wrote (and his focus on consumption and economic stagnation), he did agree on the need for financial stimulus at the beginning of what became the Great Depression.Jweaver28 (talk) 20:03, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Date of death
In different sections of this article, both January 7 and January 8 are given as the subject's date of death. I don't know which one (if either) is right. DSatz (talk) 11:46, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
Austrian Economics?
Schumpeter wasn't part of the Austrian School of Economics, we must consider the Austrian tradition as Carl Menger and Eugene Bohm-Bawerk's legacy, and Schumpeter was clearly away from that line. --190.192.43.239 (talk) 06:06, 3 October 2009 (UTC)
Absolutely agree. He was Austrian and he was an economist around that time, but he's not a member of that school. --C9900 (talk) 09:24, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
It's worth discussing a change to the lead that makes this explicit. "...an economist from Austria," for instance? I understand that this might deviate a little from the wording of other lead-in sections about individuals, but it's explicitly confusing to call Schumpeter an "Austrian economist." (No doubt lots of unfortunate Ron Paulites' heads explode when they read that and go through S's stance on socialism.)131.96.91.44 (talk) 19:23, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
While Schumpeter was by no means of the imagination a part of the Austrian school, it is perhaps worth mentioning that most of his works are a synthesis of Austrian economics and mainstream neoclassical theory. Schumpeter was highly critical of fiddling with the money supply, like most economists from the Austrian school, therefore, his work represents a synthesis of disparate theories. Yarou (talk) 20:31, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Sure, whatever, but this doesn't belong in the lead, and shouldn't be accepted uncritically (as in the summary bar that lists Schumpeter erroneously as a member of the Austrian School).131.96.91.220 (talk) 19:06, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
Just to clarify, there's some academic speculation that the right way to read Schumpeter is as a member of the Austrian School. I don't think it's correct to positively state the negation of the statement, that Schumpeter was not a member of the school, as you'll find in the "See also..." section, or that he was a member of the school. This seems like a controversial matter of exegesis. Debatably, it's not noteworthy enough to warrant it's own section.131.96.91.220 (talk) 19:22, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
The cited article and other sources usually show that Schumpeter had a close relationship with the Austrian tradition even though he wasn't a part of the core work of the "Austrian school." His relationship to the Austrians was more than just being an Austrian national. For those who want to say otherwise, please provide a source that goes beyond your personal opinion. I think we're looking at him too much from the Libertarian/Paulian/Mises.org view of the Austrian school and missing his relationship with the historical Austrian school.--Bkwillwm (talk) 19:14, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
You all are quite right, Schumpeter is an Austrian, and a sort of brother to the school, but he's not in the Austrian School anymore than Bastiat would be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.198.239.65 (talk) 22:25, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
It's written at the top of the box on the right, to my amazement, that he's part of the Austrian School.. Shouldn't that be deleted, then? Apparently the editors of this article seem to be in agreement that he can't be seen as part of the Austrian School, at least not without further qualifications.. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.247.85.103 (talk) 21:29, 21 April 2011 (UTC)
Having discussed all this, where he is obviously not a a member of the Austrian School, as much as he has been educated in Vienna -- could we finally remove the box on the top right? it does not belong there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.85.1.151 (talk) 13:24, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
Speaking as an Austrian School economist myself I'd have to agree here, at least to an extent. Schumpeter was obviously highly influenced by the Austrians, he shared their basic orientation towards methodological individualism and he also was a classical liberal. But it seems very difficult to class Schumpeter as an Austrian School economist since 1) he considered Walras the greatest economist, and 2) he's typically classified as an Evolutionary economist (potentially the founder of the field).
This discussion is fruitless: only cultist academics worry about who exactly has a "membership card" in a "school" of economics. Serious scholars don't worry about such nonsense. Schumpeter was educated by people in the main Austrian tradition, and was influenced by their work. Trying to sort out whether he was or wasn't "in" the school is pointless. GeneCallahan (talk) 19:16, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Contradictions?
Now that the bias referred to above has been removed, how do we account for this champion of Austrian Economics believing socialism would replace capitalism? Did he change his mind or was he always eccentric???--Jack Upland (talk) 09:06, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
Jack, Weiser was clearly a major part of the Austrian tradition and he WAS a socialist. The association of this tradition solely with ideological free-market advocacy is a very recent phenomena. GeneCallahan (talk) 19:18, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Keynesianism
The section of this page with that title is not really about Keynesianism at all! All it does is mention that Schumpeter and Keynes have one characteristic in common in their macroeconomic thought. GeneCallahan (talk) 19:19, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
birth place
Why does the article say Schumpeter was born in the Czech Republic? That country didn't exist when he was born. Shouldn't the article give the name of the country that existed at the time of his birth? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.107.187.254 (talk) 19:52, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Because he was a Moravian and born in the Czech Lands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.214.96.207 (talk) 11:10, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
Buzzwords, dead links, and a mention in a foreward
"Dynamic, change-oriented, and innovation-based" are buzzword worthy as used here. http://www.relooney.info/00_New_3038.pdf currently citation 21 is a dead link. In the Foreword to "The End of Prosperity", Larry Kudlow says the Reagan domestic program resulted in the generation of "Schumpeterian gales of creative destruction." Hackwrench (talk) 03:07, 14 February 2016 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Joseph Schumpeter. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
I have just modified one external link on Joseph Schumpeter. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
"Having to leave central Europe because of the rise of the Nazis[...]" Why did he have to move? Was he a Jew? Also, there's no information in this article about his ethnicity... --Dijxtra 17:14, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
Austrian German as far as I know. But you are right most people left Europe for other reasons than Hitler in Germany.
That source actually indicates he was not a Jew! In fact, it suggests, somewhat unfairly, that he was an anti-Semite. Given his name, and that of his father (Alois) I would say he was Catholic. But Hitler was threatening to people other than Jews, and the Annschluss soon claimed Austria. Schumpeter had independent and arguably pro-Marxist views, so they would be a good enough reason to leave.--Jack Upland (talk) 09:26, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
He was not a Jew. Suggesting that he was a Marxist is quite inaccurate. See his book Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. --C9900 (talk) 09:28, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
According to his biographer, McCraw, Schumpeter was an Austian Catholic, but experienced discrimination because of his dark complexion, as well as willingness to challenge the political/academic establishment.Jweaver28 (talk) 19:51, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
I see Schumpeter cited in Chinese economic strategy statements. Could someone explain Schumpeter's impact on Chinese economic strategy and planning? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.79.245.43 (talk) 09:20, 2 January 2019 (UTC)
odd third paragraph
> Schumpeter claimed that he had set himself three goals in life: to be the greatest economist in the world, to be the best horseman in all of Austria and the greatest lover in all of Vienna. He said he had reached two of his goals, but he never said which two,[6][7] although he is reported to have said that there were too many fine horsemen in Austria for him to succeed in all his aspirations.[8][9]
This seems like a very strange third paragraph of an encyclopedia entry on an academic.
Should we consider adding more of the reasoning provided in his book in support of his theory? He provided seven distinct reasons as to why his theory was a better alternative to classical theory. Zraerobertson (talk) 13:55, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
