A Critique of Kirzner's Finders-Keepers Defense of Profit

A Critique of Kirzner's Finders-Keepers Defense of Profit This paper criticizes Kirzner's use of the finders-keepers ethic to justify entrepreneurial profit. It does so by pursuing two lines of argumentation. First, Kirzner's defense of the justice of entrepreneurial profit is based upon treating the wage-for-labor-time exchange as legitimate. There are good reasons for doubting the justice of the wage-labor exchange. The paper argues that the profits earned by a capitalist firm employing wage-labor can not be considered to be just if we accept the juridical principle of imputation. The juridical principle of imputation asserts that people should be held legally responsible for the actions and results of the actions for which they are factually responsible. If we consider hired human beings always to be responsible agents, as is true in David Ellerman's (1992) rendition of the labor theory of property, Kirzner's defense of entrepreneurial profit generated in a capitalist enterprise is weakened. Second, the paper criticizes Kirzner's thesis that in a market economy everyone has, in principle, an equal opportunity to be an entrepreneur directing a productive enterprise or to be an entrepreneur engaging in speculation. Kirzner reaches this conclusion because he believes that credit markets in a free economy do not systematically discriminate amongst types of borrowers. This conclusion has been called into question by credit rationing models demonstrating that asset-poor individuals can be systematically denied access to loans. The credit rationing literature erodes the underpinnings of Kirzner's application of the finders-keepers ethic to the evaluation of entrepreneurial profit earned through speculation or productive creativity because it implies that all individuals do not in principle have an equal opportunity to be an entrepreneur. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png The Review of Austrian Economics Springer Journals

A Critique of Kirzner's Finders-Keepers Defense of Profit

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer_journal/a-critique-of-kirzner-s-finders-keepers-defense-of-profit-VDEDibuzu0
Publisher
Kluwer Academic Publishers
Copyright
Copyright © 2002 by Kluwer Academic Publishers
Subject
Economics; Public Finance; Political Science; History of Economic Thought/Methodology
ISSN
0889-3047
eISSN
1573-7128
D.O.I.
10.1023/A:1013258222155
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

This paper criticizes Kirzner's use of the finders-keepers ethic to justify entrepreneurial profit. It does so by pursuing two lines of argumentation. First, Kirzner's defense of the justice of entrepreneurial profit is based upon treating the wage-for-labor-time exchange as legitimate. There are good reasons for doubting the justice of the wage-labor exchange. The paper argues that the profits earned by a capitalist firm employing wage-labor can not be considered to be just if we accept the juridical principle of imputation. The juridical principle of imputation asserts that people should be held legally responsible for the actions and results of the actions for which they are factually responsible. If we consider hired human beings always to be responsible agents, as is true in David Ellerman's (1992) rendition of the labor theory of property, Kirzner's defense of entrepreneurial profit generated in a capitalist enterprise is weakened. Second, the paper criticizes Kirzner's thesis that in a market economy everyone has, in principle, an equal opportunity to be an entrepreneur directing a productive enterprise or to be an entrepreneur engaging in speculation. Kirzner reaches this conclusion because he believes that credit markets in a free economy do not systematically discriminate amongst types of borrowers. This conclusion has been called into question by credit rationing models demonstrating that asset-poor individuals can be systematically denied access to loans. The credit rationing literature erodes the underpinnings of Kirzner's application of the finders-keepers ethic to the evaluation of entrepreneurial profit earned through speculation or productive creativity because it implies that all individuals do not in principle have an equal opportunity to be an entrepreneur.

Journal

The Review of Austrian EconomicsSpringer Journals

Published: Oct 18, 2004

References

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 12 million articles from more than
10,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Unlimited reading

Read as many articles as you need. Full articles with original layout, charts and figures. Read online, from anywhere.

Stay up to date

Keep up with your field with Personalized Recommendations and Follow Journals to get automatic updates.

Organize your research

It’s easy to organize your research with our built-in tools.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve Freelancer

DeepDyve Pro

Price
FREE
$49/month

$360/year
Save searches from Google Scholar, PubMed
Create lists to organize your research
Export lists, citations
Read DeepDyve articles
Abstract access only
Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles
Print
20 pages/month
PDF Discount
20% off