"The Reality of the Present and the Challenge of the Future": J. Fagg Foster for the Twenty-First Century

This paper revisits J. Fagg Foster’s early assessment of the relevance of John Maynard Keynes’s theory of institutional economics. In his view, neither institutionalists nor most of Keynes’s followers really recognized the importance of Keynes’s theoretical insights. I examine Foster’s views on economic theory, with a particular focus on monetary theory. I apply Foster’s approach to what is now called modern money theory, an approach developed by heterodox economists working in the institutionalist and post-Keynesian traditions. I argue that this approach is consistent with Foster’s, and it offers a way forward to policy formation for the twenty-first century.     

The Future of Work in the Twenty-First Century

The institutional nature of work has changed dramatically over the last three hundred years, and there is no reason to assume that change will cease in the twenty-first century. This article criticizes the theoretical basis for some previous confident predictions, including deskilling (Karl Marx), and massive reductions in the extent of the working day (John Maynard Keynes). I argue that further increases in the complexity and knowledge-intensity of work under capitalism are likely, although not inevitable. I consider some implications of growing complexity for work and the employment contract. Raising the question of possible asymmetries between labor and capital, I address their role in generating future increases in inequality. On the other hand, growing complexity may lead to radical changes in the employment contract and its evolution into a form of quasi-self-employment. But, in an increasingly knowledge-intensive system, those with inadequate training or skills may be left behind. Compensatory policy measures, such as a guaranteed basic income and wealth redistribution, remain on the agenda.     

Keynes,the socialisation of trade,and international monetary institutions

While Keynes began formulating his ideas concerning the post-WWII international financial system in the early 1940s, the genesis of these ideas can be traced to his earlier work. The Keynes Plan represents the culmination of his search for adequate institutions that guide economic activity for the public good. The reasons given by Keynes for the establishment of an International Clearing Bank are relevant in the modern international economy, given the current imbalances in international trade. As Keynes argued for the socialisation of investment as a method to achieve full-employment in the domestic economy, he argued for the “socialisation of trade” as a method to achieve international economic balance among nations.     

The Ethics of Regional Policy

In the beginning, the economy was closed to ethics and as a social science had a moral dimension. However, after the marginal revolution and during the twentieth century, ethics was not considered in the economic analysis. Fortunately, this situation changed at the end of the past century. This paper analyzes the ethics of regional policy. Regional policy has an ethics dimension because its main goals are to reduce the differences among regions and to redistribute income. The objective of this paper is to analyze the relationship between regional policy and ethics, considering both targets and instruments. We will consider, mainly, the case of the European Union.     

Current global imbalances and the Keynes Plan: A Keynesian approach for reforming the international monetary system

This paper proposes a “logical experiment”, illustrating how alternative international monetary systems may produce opposite results in the global economy. In the current organisation, “key currencies” work as international money. Keynes, by contrast, proposed that this role should be assigned to a supranational, “credit” money. While the world currently lives in an asymmetric regime, which lead to what has been defined as a “balance of financial terror”, Keynes tried to achieve a more peaceful type of “international balance”. I argue that the structural reform and the technical provisions proposed by the “Keynes Plan” may still – at least in principle – provide useful remedies for international disequilibria, by remedying the asymmetries of the current international payments architecture and helping to curb both inflationary and deflationary pressures on the world economy.     

Permanent On-The-Spot Job Creation—The Missing Keynes Plan for Full Employment and Economic Transformation

The paper rejects the conventional view that Keynes had an aggregate demand approach to full employment. Instead, it proposes that he advocated a very specific labor demand targeting approach that would be implemented both in recessions and expansions. Modern policies, which aim to “close the demand gap” between current and potential output are inconsistent with Keynes's work on theoretical and methodological grounds. There is considerable evidence to suggest that a permanent program for direct or (in his words) “on-the-spot” job creation is the missing Keynes Plan for full employment and economic transformation. The current crisis presents the social economist with a unique opportunity to set fiscal policy straight along the original Keynesian lines. The paper suggests what specific form such a policy might take.     

Vicarelli’s Keynes (and today’s international disorder)

The article speculates about the legacy of Fausto Vicarelli’s interpretation of John Maynard Keynes’s work in the times of a major global crisis. In particular, it puts an emphasis on those aspects of Keynes’s “method” that Vicarelli rightly considered as revolutionary in his Keynes, of 1977, as well as in other writings. The article then turns to Vicarelli’s reconstruction of Keynes’s early work in international economics (Indian Currency and Finance, Economic Consequences of the Peace) and reflects upon the continuing relevance of the philosophy inspiring Keynes’s plans of global reform in the Forties, also in the light of Vicarelli’s (Keynes-inspired) vision of the problem of policy space at the international level.     

Was Keynes a Realist?

Lawson (1989a) has interpreted Keynes as a philosophical realist, adhering to the view that the economy has a constant inner structure. Against this it is claimed below that, although Keynes speaks about realism, it is not in this sense, but in the common sense way of referring to actually observable entities of an economic model. In addition, it can be shown that Keynes's views can be interpreted as instrumentalist—he emphasises characteristics such as usefulness and convenience, besides and instead of truth. Thus, truth and truthlike concepts do not, in Keynes's thinking, have the paramount position that they have in realist philosophy.     

The characteristics of a monetary economy: a Keynes-Schumpeter approach

Mainstream monetary theory considers money only as an instrumentmeant to facilitate trading without having any effect on incomeor on the evolution of the economic system. The aim of thispaper is to elaborate a monetary theory capable of supportingthe thesis of money non-neutrality based on the arguments developedby Keynes and Schumpeter. The synthesis of the theories of thesetwo great economists will be formulated starting from the twopoints which are common in the views of Keynes and Schumpeter.First, in contrast with mainstream theory, Keynes and Schumpeterstate that the diffusion of a fiat money induces a radical modificationinto the way in which the economic system works. Second, whenKeynes and Schumpeter describe the reasons why money and financialaggregates are not neutral, they highlight the fundamental roleof the credit market and of banks; in contrast with the mainstreamtheory, they do not consider the credit market as the mirrorimage of the goods market.     

Classical Mechanics With An Ethical Dimension: Professor Tinhergen’s Economics

This article is an attempt to present and assess Professor Jan Tinbergen’s influential work in economics. It is inspired by the controversy between John M. Keynes and Jan Tinbergen conducted in the Economic Journal over half a century ago. [Keynes 1939, 1940; Tinbergen 1940]. The key issue in the discussion was how far economic phenomena were quantifiable and representable in invariant empirical relationships. For the writing of the article at hand, this author had an additional spur: he was himself a victim of Tinbergen’s verdict that economics must quantify in order to be scientific¹. The disagreement between Keynes and Tinbergen was fundamental, but in view of the intellectual monoculture prevailing since World War II, economists considered a discussion of this sort to be increasingly unnecessary and irrelevant. However, in recent years there has been a change in the wind. On the one hand, there is increasing dissatisfaction with the paradigmatic foundations of contemporary economics, and on the other, there have been scientific advances in physics, which constitutes a major paradigmatic basis of conventional economics. This article assesses the foundations of Tinbergen’s work in view of some of the changes in the natural sciences.     

The Next Five Years (2022–2027) Will Be Crucial for Building a Modern Socialist Country in All Respects: Implications from the Report to the 20th National Congress of the CPC

As pointed out in the Report to the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC), the next five years (2022–2027) will be crucial for beginning to build a modern socialist country in all respects. Firstly, the next five years will be a period of historical transition in the central task of the CPC. The central task of the CPC will be to realize the Second Centenary Goal of building China into a great modern socialist country in all respects. At this crucial stage for getting our efforts off to a good start, China should understand and pursue the Five-Sphere Integrated Plan to advance the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation on all fronts through a Chinese path to modernization. Secondly, the next five years will be a period of deep reform in which strategic opportunities, risks and challenges are concurrent. Alongside a new round of scientific and technological revolution and industrial transformation well underway, the new principal contradiction facing Chinese society, a historical transition in the central task of the CPC, and a shift in the international balance of power, profound and complex changes are taking place in China’s internal and external environment for development. Uncertainties and unforeseen factors are rising and must be dealt with appropriately. Thirdly, the next five years will be a key period of achieving China’s overall development objectives for 2035. It is a paramount stage of meeting the 14th Five-Year Plan goals, formulating the 15th Five-Year Plan goals, and realizing Chinese modernization by 2035. China should uphold the CPC’s overall leadership, follow the path of socialism with Chinese characteristics, apply a people-centered development philosophy, remain committed to deepening reform and opening up, and carry forward our fighting spirit. Fourthly, the next five years will be a crucial period of accelerating the creation of a new pattern of development and pursuing high-quality development. Chinese modernization should be advanced through a series of strategic initiatives, such as building a high-standard socialist market economy, modernizing the industrial system, propelling rural revitalization across the board, promoting coordinated regional development, and boosting high-standard opening up. Fifthly, the next five years will be an impact period of unprecedented downward pressure on the national economy under various factors and risks beating expectations. In order to achieve the 14th Five-Year Plan goals and the overall development objectives by 2035, it is necessary to defuse the threefold pressure composed of increasing demand shrinkage, supply shocks and flagging market expectations, as well as intensifying potential risks. To accomplish the main objectives and tasks for the next five years, it is necessary to observe objective laws, apply the new development philosophy, continue to pursue economic development as central task, adopt system-based thinking, take steady steps to sustain progress, and promote high-quality development in a scientific and effective manner.     

Keynesian uncertainty and the instability of beliefs

In an influential critique, Coddington (1982) argues that Keynes uses the theme of uncertainty in an opportunistic way in the General theory emphasizing it when it suits his purposes and ignoring it when it does not. This reading is examined in the light of Keynes's earlier Treatise on probability. The first part of the paper argues that Keynes's epistemology differs in important respects from the one Coddington is attacking, and in particular, that Keynes's account contains conceptions of uncertainty not considered by Coddington. The two premises of Coddington's argument are then assessed. These are: 1) that Keynes provides no account of the relative impact of uncertainty in different decision-making contexts; and 2) that uncertainty is not a sufficient condition for unstable beliefs about future outcomes of current (investment) decisions. It is argued that Coddington is mistaken in asserting 1) and, although 2) is correct in principle, that there is nevertheless a strong presumption that uncertainty does lead to unstable beliefs in the particular situations Keynes describes. The conclusion is that the connection between uncertainty and unstable beliefs cannot be regarded as either analytically destructive or somehow beside the point, even on Coddington's terms.     

The Economic Problem of Happiness: Keynes on Happiness and Economics

By stressing the substantial continuity of vision between John Maynard Keynes’s early unpublished essays and his more mature writings, the paper discusses Keynes’s ethics and focuses on his thoughts about happiness. In particular, we emphasize the anti-utilitarianism of Keynes’s vision and his belief that material wealth is but a precondition to enjoy the possibilities of a good life, and direct attention to problems of incommensurability raised by the multidimensional nature of happiness as considered by Keynes. We then argue that the rediscovery of Keynes’s legacy in this respect may be a precious counterweight to the most controversial aspects of today’s happiness research.     

On the monetary nature of the interest rate in a Keynes–Schumpeter perspective

Abstract

Keynes, in the General Theory, explains the monetary nature of the interest rate by means of the liquidity preference theory. The objective of this article is twofold. The first objective is to point out the limits of the liquidity preference theory. The fundamental limitation of this theory is that it does not allow to realize the intent declared by Keynes in 1933 to elaborate a monetary theory of production The second objective is to present a more solid theory of the monetary nature of the interest rate. It will be shown that an essential element of this explanation is Schumpeter’s analysis of the role of bank money in a capitalist economy. In fact, this analysis represents a fundamental tool to explain the characteristics that, according to Keynes, distinguish a monetary economy from a real-exchange economy     

国家主体功能区规划实施的几个关键问题

全国主体功能区规划已获得国务院通过并开始实施。作为一项国家空间战略布局规划,主体功能区规划的实施必将作为“十二五”时期及今后一段时期内经济社会工作的重点。为推动主体功能区规划的顺利实施,各级政府需要对主体功能区规划实施的关键问题形成共识。在主体功能区规划实施中,对主体功能区的认识、主体功能区规划实施的主体、主体功能区的划分、主体功能区的协调与调整、主体功能区的监测与评价、主体功能区政策措施落实、主体功能区的考核、主体功能区实施的组织保障、主体功能区规划实施的技术支撑、主体功能区实施的挑战与机遇等是需要重点关注的问题。     

Monetary policy on interest rates: a retrospective analysis since Thornton

Abstract

In response to the affirmation by certain authors and critics of a recent return to an interest-rate policy that, in their opinion, resembles a throwback to the nineteenth century theory of monetary policy on interest rates, I pose the question of the difficulties of interest-rate policy in a retrospective analysis beginning with the current that founded the short-term interest rate policy within classical analysis and by focusing my discussion on several key authors (Thornton, Banking School, Bagehot, Wicksell, Keynes, contemporary authors such as Woodford). To this end, I study the importance that the interbank money market plays for these authors, which determines the target rate for the central bank.     

Work and consumption in an era of unbalanced technological advance

Keynes’s “Grandchildren” essay famously predicted both a rapid increase in productivity and a sharp shrinkage of the workweek – to 15 h – over the century from 1930. Keynes was right (so far) about output per capita, but wrong about the workweek. The key reason is that he failed to allow for changing distribution. With widening inequality, median income (and therefore the income of most families) has risen, and is now rising, much more slowly than he anticipated. The failure of the workweek to shrink as he predicted follows. Other factors, including habit formation, socially induced consumption preferences, and network effects are part of the story too. Combining the analysis of Keynes, Meade and Galbraith suggests a way forward for economic policy under the prevailing circumstances.     

The Marshallian Market and the Walrasian Economy. Two Incompatible Bedfellows

The aim of this paper is to question a view which is usually taken for granted, namely that the Marshallian partial equilibrium and Walrasian general equilibrium analysis stand in a relationship of continuity. It will be claimed that the contrary is true: the generalisation of the Marshallian market does not lead to a Walrasian economy or, conversely, the Walrasian economy is not composed of Marshallian markets. To bring this point home, the basic methodological choices underpinning the analysis of the Marshallian market and of the Walrasian economy will be compared. The issue of why no full-fledged Marshallian representation of the economy has arisen which might stand as an alternative to the Walrasian account will also be investigated and a series of reasons for this lack of generalisation of the Marshallian market will be considered. Finally, it will be claimed that if the Marshallian economy concept has no explicit existence, it has nonetheless an implicit one. It forms the background against which a series of reasoning about the working of the economy as a whole, which cannot fit the Walrasian economy framework, are developed. No less prestigious names than those of Keynes, Hicks, Patinkin, Friedman, Clower and Leijonhufvud will be adduced as witnesses.     

Reply to Alan Day Haight

Alan Day Haight is incorrect in understanding Piketty’s paradox as a “dynamic version” of Keynes’ paradox of thrift. Keynes’ paradox of thrift deals with equilibrium conditions relating to the flows of savings and investment. In contrast, the capital output ratio central to Piketty’s paradox deals with a stock (capital) relative to a flow (output). Balanced growth cannot be considered an “equilibrium” condition without specifying an adjustment mechanism whereby balanced growth is re-established when the capital-output ratio becomes unbalanced. As illustrated by the Harrod-Domar case this unbalancing can be particularly degenerative when idle capacity develops.     

On Microfoundations and Keynes’ Economics

Most mainstream economists regard the principles of ‘rational choice’ theory as the only foundation of economics and insist that macroeconomics be based on those principles. These include certainty or certainty-equivalence, which followers of Keynes reject. Macrofoundations of microeconomics are often proposed instead. We argue that the issue is more complex and explain why it is unlikely that a logically watertight fit between the two levels of analysis will ever be achieved. The complex interactions within and between the two levels suggest that it is unhelpful to assign foundational status to either level. We examine Keynes’ General Theory is examined as an example and compromises are found to fit the two together. It is argued that compromise is inevitable and that good theorising entails defending the compromises made.