Financialization resulted from deliberate deregulatory political choices, not market forces.

Evidence

Tomaskovic-Devey and Lin ð2011Þ document the series of political-institutional shifts in the United States that led to these income transfers as both profits and compensation, concluding that financialization was not a neutral product of market mechanisms but rather the result of specific political decisions to deregulate existing finance activities and to refrain from regulating new financial products, in an era of expanding neoliberal governance ideologies and finance sector political influence. — Ken-Hou Lin & Donald Tomaskovic-Devey, Financialization and U.S. Income…, 17

Categorization

• XREF: Connects financialization to the reader’s institutional/governance lens on inequality drivers. — connects to: Financialization is integral to capitalism, not a product of deregulatory excess — Max Haiven, Cultures of Financialization, 34; Financialization is a political project tied to US hegemony, not a market efficiency outcome. — Natascha van der Zwan, Making Sense of Financialization, 35; The barrier to financial reform is political power, not legislative complexity — Andrew deWaard, Derivative Media: How Wall Street…, 455 (+4 more)

Related

• Financialization is a political project tied to US hegemony, not a market efficiency outcome. (similarity 0.85)
• Financialization ultimately represents markets displacing social institutions as society’s organizing principle. (similarity 0.83)
• Legislative deregulation drove the US financial sector’s postwar expansion (similarity 0.83)
• Financialization is integral to capitalism, not a product of deregulatory excess (similarity 0.83)
• Financialization shifts capital intermediation from institutions to markets. (similarity 0.83)
• The US economy became increasingly financialized in the post-1970s period. (similarity 0.83)
• Financialization accelerated through 1970s-80s deregulation and state support (similarity 0.82)
• Financial markets reshaped households, corporations, and states over the past 30 years. (similarity 0.82)
• Financialization is a pattern of accumulation dominated by financial channels over trade and production (similarity 0.82)
• Financialization comprises both finance-sector dominance and nonfinance firms’ financial investing. (similarity 0.82)
• Financialization marks a decisive shift from production-based to finance-driven accumulation. (similarity 0.82)
• Deregulation let non-finance firms pursue financial activities, fueling debt expansion (similarity 0.82)
• Financialization channels income toward the wealthy and depresses productive investment and wages. (similarity 0.80)
• Finance has come to dominate American economic life. (similarity 0.80)
• US financialization accelerated sharply after 1980 deregulation (similarity 0.80)

Broader Connections

• Financialization is integral to capitalism, not a product of deregulatory excess #contradicts (0.92) — Max Haiven, Cultures of Financialization, 34
• Financialization is a political project tied to US hegemony, not a market efficiency outcome. #corroborates (0.90) — Natascha van der Zwan, Making Sense of Financialization, 35
• Hostile-takeover markets and Reagan politics, not finance theory, drove 1980s financialization #corroborates (0.85) — Donald MacKenzie, An Engine, Not a Camera, 1175
• Public officials adopt financialization not from ideology but from state incapacities #qualifies (0.80) — Ève Chiapello, Financialisation of Valuation, 105
• Market economies require deliberate political construction, not natural emergence #expands (0.78) — Nick Couldry & Ulises A. Mejias, The Costs of Connection, 364
• The barrier to financial reform is political power, not legislative complexity #qualifies (0.75) — Andrew deWaard, Derivative Media, 455
• Whether financialization causes neoliberalism or the reverse remains disputed. #qualifies (0.75) — Natascha van der Zwan, Making Sense of Financialization, 37