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.     

Men of Steel Meet the Market: Interpreting Firm Behavior in Russia’s Metallurgy Industry

In Capital in the Twenty-First Century, Thomas Piketty (2014) explains growing income inequality via the difference between the rate of return on capital and the growth rate of the economy: the “r > g” inequality. Even if it is true that r > g leads to increasing inequality, nearly every school of economic thought predicts that r will fall as the economy grows. Thus, for Capital (2014) to be a comprehensive theory of inequality, a more adequate theory of r is required. I term this the “Piketty Problem.” I offer a solution to this problem from an institutionalist perspective.     

The Capital-to-Income Ratio: Thoughts Engendered by the Work of Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez

This article examines the connection between economic growth and the capital-to-income ratio in the context of the work done on wealth distribution by Thomas Piketty and Emmanuel Saez. The article employs a simple mathematical formulation to understand the key influences on the capital-to-income ratio, and uses the stage theory of capitalism to conceptualize the long term theoretical relationship between growth and wealth concentration. The article contends (i) that inequality and growth are negatively related, (ii) that high wealth concentration can lead to low growth rates and vice versa, and (iii) that high inequality augments savings and speculation which, together, undermine growth and financial stability.     

To Save or to Consume: Linking Growth Theory with the Keynesian Model

In the neoclassical growth theory, higher saving rate gives rise to higher output per capita. However, in the Keynesian model, higher saving rate causes lower consumption, which may lead to a recession. Students may ask, "Should we save or should we consume?" In most of the macroeconomics textbooks, economic growth and Keynesian economics are in separate, sometimes unsequential, chapters. The connection between the short run and the long run is not apparent. The author builds a bridge between the neoclassical growth theory and the Keynesian model. He links the Solow diagram and the IS-LM curves and depicts the short-run to long-run transition of the economy after changes in saving and other macroeconomic policies.     

Keynes‐Marx and Keynes‐Wicksell Models of Monetary Growth: A framework for future analysis

This paper reconsiders and generalizes a dichotomizing two-sector real growth model of Marglin which claims that the steady state of capitalist economies is plagued by secular inflation. We show that this implication need not be true from the perspective of a more general steady state analysis and that the Marglin model can be embedded into a general Keynes‐Marx‐Friedman or Keynes‐Wicksell framework where money is superneutral, where therefore inflation is due solely to excessive monetary growth, where the private sector is basically asymptotically stable and where there is a steady state rate of employment that differs from the 'natural' rate of employment of monetarist models of inflation. We consider this model a benchmark model that requires equally general alternatives if the above implications are to be rejected.     

Uninsured idiosyncratic investment risk and aggregate saving

This paper augments the neoclassical growth model to study the macroeconomic effects of uninsured idiosyncratic investment, or capital-income, risk. Under standard assumptions for preferences and technologies, individual policy rules are linear in individual wealth, ensuring that the equilibrium dynamics for aggregate quantities and prices are independent of the wealth distribution. The analysis thus remains highly tractable despite the incompleteness of markets. As compared to complete markets, the steady state is characterized by both a lower interest rate and a lower capital stock when the elasticity of intertemporal substitution is higher than the fraction of private equity in total wealth. For empirically plausible parameterizations, this condition is easily satisfied, and the reduction in aggregate saving and income is quantitatively significant. These findings contrast with Bewley models, where idiosyncratic labor-income risk leads to higher aggregate saving and income.     

Inequality: The original economic sin of capitalism? An Evaluation of Thomas Piketty's "Capital in the twenty-first century"

This is a review article of Thomas Piketty's book “Capital in the twenty-first century”. Piketty promotes the old theme that, under capitalism, the rich tend to become richer and the poor become poorer, at least in relative terms. We consider whether the data really shows that wealth and income are becoming more concentrated; the role of income transfers (Piketty's data is for pre-tax and pre-transfer income) and other influences on inequality such as real estate prices; the implications of social and economic mobility; the role of the state in fostering inequality; and the determination of socially acceptable inequality. We conclude that Piketty has not succeeded in showing that the inequality r > g (the rate of return is greater than the rate of growth) is the principal determinant of inequality. Piketty offers neither an accompanying theory of social justice nor a theoretical framework to support his case. In particular, lacking is a revealed appreciation of the effects of high marginal tax rates on growth and efficiency.     

Income Distribution,Econophysics and Piketty

Piketty, Atkinson and Saez have put the analysis of income distribution back on center stage. The distinction between property income and labor income plays a central role in this framework. Property income derives from the rate of return on stocks of income-earning wealth and is more unequally distributed than labor income. Piketty argues that, because the rate of return (r) is generally greater than the rate of growth of the economy (g), property income tends to grow more rapidly than labor income, so that rising income inequality is an intrinsic tendency of capitalism despite interruptions due to world wars and great depressions. This article argues the exact opposite. The rise of unions and the welfare state were the fruits of long-term historical gains made by labor, and the postwar constraints on real and financial capital arose in sensible reaction to the Great Depression. The ‘neoliberal’ era beginning in the 1980s significantly rolled back all of these. The article uses the econophysics two-class argument of Yakovenko to show that we can explain the empirical degree of inequality using two factors alone: the profit share and the degree of financialization of income. The rise of inequality in the neoliberal era then derives from a reduction in the wage share (rise in the profit share) in the face of assaults on labor and the welfare state, and a sharp increase in the financialization of incomes as financial controls are weakened. These are inherently socio-political outcomes, and what was lost can be regained. Hence, there is no inevitable return to Piketty’s ‘patrimonial capitalism’.     

Endogenous phase switch in Baumol's service paradox model

This paper develops a two-sector model that considers Baumol's service paradox. The paper simultaneously incorporates two ideas about technological progress in the model: (1) the consumption of services contributes to human capital accumulation and (2) the production of manufacturing leads to technological progress due to learning-by-doing. Accordingly, productivity growth in both services and manufacturing is endogenously determined. We show that initially, a shift in the employment share toward the services sector decreases the per capita real GDP growth rate, but at some point in time, the shift begins to increase the growth rate. Therefore, we observe an endogenous phase switch from a phase where the employment shift toward services depresses the economy to another where the employment shift promotes the economy.     

Wealth,Capital and the Theory of Distribution: Some Implications for Piketty’s Analysis

Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the Twenty-First Century (2014) has been spectacularly successful. One reason for this is that while it often challenges received views and supports a non-apologetic interpretation of capitalism, at the same time it relies on mainstream economics. This theoretical framework, however, is not always conducive to consistency and interpretative accuracy. This paper points out some of the book’s analytical weaknesses and shows that some empirical evidence, a clearer distinction between wealth and capital, and a different theoretical perspective, could lead to questioning some of the book’s claims. In particular, it argues that the increase in the wealth-to-output ratio (but not the capital-to-output ratio) cannot explain the observed changes in income shares. It also contends that non-mainstream perspectives on income distribution and growth suggest that changes in income distribution are due more to policy and power relations than to the factors Piketty identifies.     

Asset bubbles,labour market frictions and R&D‐based growth

Employing an overlapping generations model of R&D‐based growth with labour market frictions, this paper examines how employment changes induced by labour market frictions influence asset bubbles and long‐run economic growth. Asset bubbles can (cannot) exist when the employment rate is high (low), which leads to higher (lower) economic growth through labour market efficiency. We also explore the steady state and transitional dynamics of bubbles, economic growth and employment. Furthermore, we show that policy or parameter changes with a negative influence on the labour market can lead to a bubble burst.     

Keynes' theory of money and his attack on the classical model

This paper centers on Keynes' theory of money and his attack on the classical model. Keynes criticized the self-correcting model of the British orthodoxy along two separate lines. In the first, in which Keynes' theory of money was crucial, he took the institutional variables as given and examined the functional relationships. Keynes' burden was to undermine what he termed the "classical dichotomy," where money was a veil, playing no role in determining output and employment. Two key features of the orthodox model were loanable funds and quantity theories, and Keynes' theory of money emerged from the rejection of these theories. The key to his attack on the classical dichotomy was the speculative demand for money, which he presented as an indirect, unstable function of the interest rate. Hence, Keynes linked money demand to the interest rate. The interest rate was thus determined by monetary variables rather than real factors, contrary to British orthodox opinion. Keynes then demonstrated that intended investment and saving need not be equal at a full employment equilibrium.A previous version of this paper was presented at the Fiftieth International Atlantic Economic Conference, October 15–18, 2000, Charleston, South Carolina. The authors are grateful to participants for their helpful suggestions. The authors are responsible for any remaining errors.     

A Keynesian explanation of Indian government bond yields

Abstract

John Maynard Keynes held that the central bank’s actions mainly determine long-term interest rates through short-term interest rates and various monetary policy measures. His conjectures about the determinants of long-term interest rates were made in the context of advanced capitalist economies and were based on his views on liquidity preference, ontological uncertainty, and the formation of investors’ expectations. Is Keynes’s conjecture that the central bank’s action is the main driver of long-term interest rates valid in emerging markets, such as India? This paper empirically investigates the determinants of changes in Indian government bonds’ nominal yields. Changes in short-term interest rates, after controlling for other crucial variables, such as changes in the rate of inflation and the rate of economic activity, take a lead role in driving the changes of the nominal yields of Indian government bonds. This suggests that Keynes’s views on long-term interest rates can also be applicable to emerging markets. The empirical findings reveal that higher fiscal deficits do not appear to exert upward pressures on government bond yields in India.     

Optimal time-consistent fiscal policy under endogenous growth with elastic labor supply

We explore the implications of incorporating an elastic labor supply in an endogenous growth economy when characterizing the time-consistent Markov policy. We consider two policy instruments: an income tax rate and the split of government spending between consumption and production services. The Markov-perfect policy implies a higher income tax rate and a larger proportion of government spending allocated to consumption than those chosen under a commitment constraint on the part of the government. As a consequence, economic growth is slightly lower under the Markov-perfect policy than under the Ramsey policy. Under the Markov and Ramsey optimal policies, a higher weight of leisure in households' preferences leads to a lower optimal income tax rate and a lower proportion of public resources devoted to consumption. We also show that the policy bias that would arise when imposing a Markov policy designed ignoring the presence of leisure in the utility function would lead to a significant welfare loss.     

A nonbehavioral theory of saving

The article presents a demand-driven model, where the saving rate of households at the bottom of the income distribution becomes the endogenous variable that adjusts for full employment to be maintained over time. An increase in income inequality and the current account deficit and a consolidation of the government budget lead to a decrease in the saving rate of the household sector. Such a process is unsustainable because it leads to an increase in the debt-to-income ratio of the households and its maintenance depends on some kind of asset bubble. This framework allows us to better understand the factors that led to the Great Recession in the United States and the dilemma of the present and the future regarding a repeat of this unsustainable process or secular stagnation.     

The Literature on Piketty

The extensive critical literature on Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the Twenty-First Century is surveyed under nine headings. The first deals with the conservative argument that inequality in the distribution of wealth does not matter, since a rising tide lifts all boats. Second, it is claimed that Piketty’s prediction of continuously increasing inequality and the return of ‘patrimonial capitalism’ is unjustified. Third, the quality of the empirical evidence that he cites is questioned, on a number of quite different grounds. Fourth, some critics object that Piketty’s explanation of long-run trends in the distribution of wealth is too general and too theoretical. Fifth is the argument that he has used the correct (neoclassical) theory incorrectly, exaggerating the elasticity of substitution of capital for labour. Against this, post-Keynesian critics claim, sixthly, that Piketty is using the wrong theory, and should have drawn on the Kaldor–Pasinetti model of distribution and growth, and not the discredited neoclassical analysis. Seventh, Piketty has been criticised for ignoring the distribution of wealth in developing countries. Eighth, there is a wide range of objections to his most striking policy proposal, for a progressive global wealth tax. Finally, several critics from outside economics complain that Piketty has neglected a number of non-economic dimensions of inequality. I conclude by welcoming both the book and the critical literature, and calling for the distribution of wealth to be placed back on the political agenda.     

Keynes's theory of liquidity preference and his debt management and monetary policies

This paper seeks to bolster the view that Keynes was a monetaryeconomist concerned primarily with monetary and not fiscal policy.His most fundamental policy conclusion for national economieswas that the authorities could control the long-term rate ofinterest and should do so to promote investment, growth andemployment. Keynes's theory of liquidity preference is presentedas a theory of money as a store of value that leads to thisfundamental policy conclusion. The theory is then applied toexplain the debt management, monetary and international financialpolicies that were adopted in World War II.     

Piketty’s Elasticity of Substitution: A Critique

This article examines Thomas Piketty’s explanation of a falling wage share. Piketty explains rising income inequality between labor and capital as a result of one parameter of a production function: an elasticity of substitution, σ, between labor and capital greater than one. This article reviews Piketty’s elasticity argument, which relies on a non-standard definition of capital. In light of the theory of land rent, it discusses why the non-standard capital definition is a measure of wealth, not capital and is problematic for estimating elasticities. It then presents simple long-run estimates of σ in constant elasticity of substitution functions for Piketty’s data as well as for a subset of his capital measure that comes closer to the standard definition of productive capital. The estimation results cast doubt on Piketty’s hypothesis that σ is greater than one.     

Social security in a Classical growth model

This paper develops a growth model with overlapping generationsof workers who save for life-cycle reasons and Ricardian capitalistswho save from a bequest motive. The population of workers accommodatesgrowth, so that the rate of capital accumulation is endogenousand determines the growth of employment. Two regimes are possible,one in which workers' saving dominates the long run and a secondin which the long-run equilibrium growth rate is determinedcompletely by the capitalist saving function, sometimes calledthe Cambridge equation. The second regime exhibits a versionof the Pasinetti paradox: changes in workers' saving affectthe level, but not the growth rate, of capital in the long run.Applied to social security, this result implies that an unfundedsystem relying on payroll taxes reduces workers' lifetime wealthand saving, creating level effects on the capital stock withoutaffecting its long-run growth rate. These effects are mitigatedby the presence of a reserve fund, various levels of which areexamined. Calibrating the model to realistic parameter valuesfor the US facilitates an interpretation of the controversiesover the percentage of the national wealth originating in life-cyclesaving and the effects of social security on saving. The modelis offered as an analytical framework for the review of currenttopics in fiscal policy, in particular identifying the socialsecurity reserve fund as a potential vehicle for generatingcapital accumulation and effecting a progressive redistributionof wealth.     

中国企业储蓄率 ——来自企业的微观证据

实施扩大内需战略，实现经济结构调整，促进经济增长，是当前中国经济政策的重要内容，而对中国储蓄率的分析则是扩大内需战略研究的逻辑起点。作为国民储蓄率的重要构成，企业储蓄率的研究尤为重要。本文在对企业储蓄率界定进行调整的基础上，利用统计局工业企业数据库1996—2007年共1886万个企业微观数据对中国企业储蓄率进行分析。研究得出的结论是：（1）中国企业储蓄率依然处于较高的水平，1996—2007年这12年的企业平均储蓄率高达287%（储蓄占工业增加值比重），近几年依然在逐年上升；（2）中国企业储蓄率在绝对水平上始终高于发达国家，但当前企业储蓄率持续增高已经成为一个全球性趋势而非中国的特有现象；（3）民营企业储蓄率整体水平约为253%，低于国有企业和外资企业，但是民营企业储蓄率保持了较高的增长水平，而外资企业和国有企业储蓄率水平则有不同程度的下降；（4）中国企业储蓄率具有明显的行业特征，传统的劳动密集型行业的企业储蓄率相对较低，资金密集型行业的企业储蓄率相对较高。