Creative destruction economics was created by economist Paul Graham in 1990 as a way to explain the economic and political costs of the world’s most expensive artwork.
Graham’s book, The Art of Destruction, is still widely read and used today.
The economics of destruction: How the art market is killing creativity, by James C. Scott, was published in 2010 and is still popular today.
But Graham, who was himself a prolific writer and speaker, says his book, which has sold more than a million copies worldwide, doesn’t address the underlying economic forces that drove the growth of art destruction in the first place.
“What you find in The Art Of Destruction is the opposite of what you’d expect to find in economics,” Graham told CNNMoney.
“If you’re looking for a story about economic growth, you’re going to find it in economics.”
Graham points to the global art market’s explosive growth in the 1990s and early 2000s as evidence that destroying art is not just about money.
“We saw the market explode and the price of art was going up exponentially,” he said.
The explosion of the global market for art destroyed everything Graham had come to know as the art of destruction, from paintings to sculptures to music.
But the global economy was also undergoing a revolution that was making art destruction even more lucrative.
The art market was experiencing an explosion in the early 2000 and early 2010s.
Graham and other economists say that’s because the economic conditions that created the boom for art destruction were the same conditions that led to a boom in other industries, like computers and television.
That was the world of the 1990, a time when the global financial crisis was just beginning to emerge.
In addition to the economic boom, Graham and others have argued, art destruction was a way for art lovers to experience a new sense of freedom.
“I have always said that art destruction is about art, and if you think about art and the world around it, there’s always something you can do that doesn’t involve killing, and killing is the thing that gets you in the zone,” Graham said.
“The only thing you can’t do is kill and kill, and that’s art destruction.”
A New Hope?
Graham’s new book, What is Creativity?, focuses on the economic, social and political forces that allowed the art destruction to thrive in the marketplace in the decades after the art bubble burst.
It also takes a look at the ways in which art destruction has evolved over time and how it might help create a new economy in the future.
The first economic boom in the 1970s and 1980s was driven by a boom that occurred after the collapse of the gold and silver prices and the beginning of the new global financial system.
The boom also saw the creation of an art-destroying industry.
“That was the boom,” Graham explained.
“And I think what’s important about the art-deregulation boom, and I think the art industry is important as well, is that the art, the art destroyed, was a huge part of that.”
The rise of the art world Graham points out that artists who were not producing anything could have a significant impact on the market.
“Art was the one thing you could get into that was not about killing and killing, but it was about creating art,” he explained.
Artists were able to sell the works they created through art auctions, which gave them a market share that was nearly unlimited.
In the 2000s, artists were able access the market for their art via a number of media outlets, like online auction sites, which made it easier for them to sell their work.
And there was also the global distribution of art through the Internet, where artists were also able to get their works out into the world.
The growth of the market was also driven by the global economic crisis, which was driven in part by the collapse in the prices of art.
The economy of destruction The art industry was also affected by the financial crisis of 2007-2008.
That triggered a boom for the art markets that created more jobs and revenue for the global artists.
Graham points specifically to the rise of artists like David Graeber, whose work had previously been seen as the stuff of art history.
Graebers work was featured in an exhibit in London in 2007.
It wasn’t until 2008, when the recession hit the art business that Graebs art went from being largely seen as an historical artifact to being a valuable commodity that could be purchased by collectors.
Graham says this economic boom also led to an expansion of the digital economy, which created a new class of artists that was able to create new kinds of work.
“When the financial system crashed, a new generation of artists could go to the Internet and create art,” Graham pointed out.
“They could create art that was just about killing.”
The art destruction explosion in 2011-2012 was fueled by a new wave of art lovers that had never been interested in the art they were buying.
“There’s a lot