Talk:Kondratiev wave

Economics Mid‑importance

	Business and economics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Economics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Economics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EconomicsWikipedia:WikiProject EconomicsTemplate:WikiProject EconomicsEconomics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Finance & Investment Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Finance & Investment, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to Finance and Investment on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Finance & InvestmentWikipedia:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentTemplate:WikiProject Finance & InvestmentFinance & Investment articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Archives

Archive 1

This page has archives. Sections older than 900 days may be automatically archived by when more than 4 sections are present.

"Criticism of long cycles" is badly written

The last section of "Criticism of long cycles" is just gibberish. I recommend to delete the paragraph.09:35, 4 July 2017 (UTC)193.196.11.188 (talk)

I agree. It seems to be an incoherent defence of long cycles. I've deleted it.--Jack Upland (talk) 10:02, 4 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2022 edit - There is an arbitrary sentence at the bottom of this section - "Joseph Schumpeter, a professor at Harvard University, was among the key advocates of the existence of Kondratiev wave."

This is not relevant to this section, and it's irrelevance could bring the reader to false implications. Such as - "Oh Joseph Schumpeter must be a professor now discredited, and thus it standards as a point of criticism for K-Waves, given he was a proponent, and now is discredited, given it is listed within the criticism section".... Or "Joseph Schumpeter was a key advocate, but must have also had his criticisms, given this is listed within the criticism section"

I am assuming the sentence is meant to be taken as a possible rebuttal to a given criticism or criticism in general, however the section is not such developed to facilitate specific rebuttals.

-Also needs referencing, and more importantly specifics/relevancy of the advocations Joseph S bestowed upon K-Wave Theory, or rather it's specific points of rebuttal to a given criticism.

Deleting sentence - "Joseph Schumpeter, a professor at Harvard University, was among the key advocates of the existence of Kondratiev wave." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2407:7000:986C:1300:2873:8BBA:3A5:97B4 (talk) 11:25, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Birthrates higher in Spring Economies; where Opportunity is high.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 07:59, 28 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Standardised topic self-referencing, changes mid article

The article should continue referencing the topic as K-Waves, or Kondratiev Waves. Instead Long-Waves becomes used.

Apart from the first sentence, it is unclear whether Kondratiev Waves and Long-Waves are the same thing, or if Long-Waves are a sub-topic within the main topic/thesis that is Kondratiev Waves.

Example of significance: - Narrator : "Criticism of Long-Waves:" - Observer's internal monologue: "Oh, there's no criticism section of Kondratiev Waves, only his thesis sub-topic that is 'Long-waves'... Everything but long waves is uncontested."

Topic heading 'Criticism of Long-Waves' should be changed to 'Criticism of Kondratiev Waves', or Kondratiev Wave Theory. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2407:7000:986C:1300:2873:8BBA:3A5:97B4 (talk) 11:13, 18 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some content should move to Kuznets swing

Several of the sections in the "Explanations of the cycle" section seem to not be long cycles and so should be moved to the Kuznets swing page. In particular, the 'land speculation' and 'debt deflation' sections. Fresheneesz (talk) 15:25, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]