Book reviews

Abstract

This article contributes to the literature on the Hayek–Keynes controversy on two points. The first contribution is to show that the question of the micro-foundations of macroeconomics is crucial to understand the Hayek–Keynes controversy. The second contribution is to reveal that Hayek's attack on the micro-foundations issue had a methodological impact on the making of the General Theory especially via the concept of marginal efficiency of capital. The paper concludes that what finally contrasts Hayek and Keynes is the kind of micro-foundations that economists should adopt to explain business cycles.     

Neglected Implications of Neoclassical Capital-Labour Substitution for Investment Theory: Another Criticism of Say's Law

Abstract

Recent mainstream macroeconomic models take Say's Law for granted. This paper argues that the justification for this assumption is not found in general equilibrium theory but in the ‘neoclassical-synthesis’ (and then monetarist) criticism of Keynes, which relies in a fundamental way on a treatment of investment that turns out to depend not only on neoclassical capital-labour substitution (called into questioned by the Cambridge controversies) but also on an assumption of full labour employment that on the contrary should be a result of the analysis. This paper first criticizes the attempt to justify a negative interest-elastic investment function through adjustment costs, that is, without relying on traditional neoclassical capital-labour substitution, with special attention on the treatment in Romer's advanced textbook. Then it proceeds to its new contribution, the demonstration that an endogenous determination of labour employment raises questions about the capacity of decreases in the real wage to raise employment even accepting neoclassical capital-labour substitution, because when the latter is correctly understood the rate of interest does not suffice to determine investment; hence, there is an inevitable role for the accelerator (and Say's Law is thereby undermined). This was perceived by Dornbusch and Fischer but they did not realize that then reductions of real wages will reduce investment instead of raising it. Thus, the ‘neoclassical synthesis’ reply to Keynes is undermined even apart from the inconsistencies of neoclassical capital theory. So the paper exposes a deficiency of the neoclassical arguments in support of a tendency toward full employment, additional to the inconsistencies revealed by the capital critique.     

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.     

Some Misunderstood Aspects of the Final Chapter of Keynes’s General Theory

ABSTRACT

Some seriously misunderstood issues arise in three paragraphs in the last chapter of Keynes’s General Theory concerning the relationship between his theory and orthodox theory. That these passages permit a form of theoretical reconciliation is a view shared by prominent commentators of opposing persuasions. Joan Robinson and John Eatwell strongly criticised Keynes for inconsistency and for opening the door to neoclassical elements that undermine his theorising, while Paul Samuelson made Keynes’s comments the foundation of his textbook neoclassical synthesis. The reconciliation view, however, is based on hasty non-contextual readings and is mistaken. More careful analysis leads to three conclusions: neither internal inconsistency nor neoclassical appeasement exists; Keynes’s paragraphs are aligned with the theoretical positions previously advanced in the General Theory; and what is actually deployed is a complementarity view relating his macro-theory to one particular part of orthodox micro-theory. Rejecting the dominant view, however, does not remove the issue of the absence in Keynes’s work of an adequately exposited micro-theory to accompany his macro-theory.     

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.     

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     

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.     

Marx,Finance and Political Economy

ABSTRACT

Shortly after the publication of Volume I of Capital, the financial requirements of capitalist enterprise forced the financial innovation of bond and stock finance for joint stock companies. Marx intended to re-write Capital in order to incorporate this change. He did not achieve this. The economic analysis of capitalism with long-term finance was undertaken by Hilferding in his Finance Capital. Thereafter, a strand of economic analysis of production and distribution emerged in the work of the Austro-Marxists, Veblen, Keynes, Kalecki, Steindl and Sweezy, and the Italian Kaleckians, Joseph Halevi and Riccardo Bellofiore, which incorporated the change made to the structure and dynamics of capitalism by long-term finance. However, this shift in capitalist financing has largely been ignored in economic theory, while much of the heterodox analysis that seeks to challenge the role of finance in contemporary capitalism has not integrated finance consistently. The change from the classic capitalism to finance capital raises important questions about the meaning and relevance of Marx’s work today.     

Hayek and Keynes: From a common critique of economic method to different theories of expectations

The methodological positions of Hayek and Keynes contain striking similarities. Both authors opposed empiricist approaches to economics that assign priority to mere observation as the source of knowledge. Both emphasised intentionality, motivation and human agency. Notwithstanding this common ground, they had different conceptions of how beliefs are formed and had different explanations of thought and action in economics. Hayek grounded his explanation on an evolutionary theory of the mind, i.e. on psychological premises, whereas Keynes based his view of belief formation on probable reasoning, where probability is a logical concept. Starting from psychological premises Hayek maintained that individuals act rationally only by following rules. As a consequence, he considered conventional expectations to be the primary guide for agents in economic life. Keynes agreed that conventional expectations actually guide economic behaviour, but he maintained that they are justified only in situations of total ignorance. In conditions of limited knowledge, agents can base their action on reasonable expectations, independently of conventions. Moreover, agents?particularly those institutions responsible for economic policy?ought to shun conventional behaviour in order to counteract its negative social consequences. We argue that Keynes's theory of expectations is well grounded upon his theory of logical probability. Hence his advocacy of discretionary policy is rationally justified.     

Keynes’s view of deficits and functional finance: a Modern Monetary Theory perspective

Abstract

The immediate aftermath of the global financial crisis (GFC) was characterised by a resurgence of interest in the work of Keynes. Fiscal policy became at least temporarily acceptable again, in turn leading to government deficits and debt, as a proportion of GDP, reaching levels not seen since before the onset of the neoliberal period. Keynes’s own pronouncements on deficit financing generated renewed interest. Despite the strength of the neoclassical counterattack – which has been relatively successful in reassessing the crisis as a government failure – confidence in orthodox economics has not been fully restored, at least outside the confines of academia. Although the hopes of heterodox economists – that the GFC might mark the beginning of the end of the neoclassical hegemony – have not been realised, the upswing in interest in Keynes’s views has not entirely died away. This paper considers Keynes’s views of deficits and debt and then looks at the controversial area of Keynes’s position vis-à-vis functional finance. The paper concludes by considering how Modern Monetary Theory might increase our understanding of the nature of deficits and debt and thus provide valuable insights which might underpin the use of fiscal policy to pursue public purpose.     

Patinkin as a reader of Keynes’ General Theory: Are wage cuts a good remedy to unemployment?1

Abstract

This paper analyses Patinkin's appraisal of Keynes’ concept of involuntary unemployment while focusing on his reading of the General Theory Chapter 19. On several critical issues, Patinkin departs from Keynes’ original matters of concerns. He leans against an individual criterion for unemployment and implicitly endorses Wicksell's understanding of voluntary unemployment as chosen leisure. His appraisal of involuntary unemployment as a disequilibrium phenomenon ultimately relies on nominal rigidities and assumes the existence of a competitive adjustment process. On all these three critical points, Patinkin departs from Keynes but also initiates the contemporary New Keynesian programme that went even further from Keynes.     

Sraffa,Keynes and 'The Years of High Theory'

This paper argues that Shackle's interpretation of 'the years of high theory' is flawed. Shackle (1967) sees Sraffa's critique of the Marshallian theory of value only as a step in the development of the theory of imperfect competition. In the same vein, Shackle reduces the message of Keynes's General Theory to the claim that unemployment results from the existence of uncertainty and irrational expectations. Thus, Shackle leaves open the possibility that both Sraffa's critique of Marshall and Keynes's theory of effective demand do not question the internal coherence of neoclassical theory, but instead merely assert that market imperfections render it irrelevant for the analysis of the real world. This paper argues, in contrast, that the theories of Sraffa and Keynes should be interpreted as radical departures from marginalism, and represent a return to the surplus approach of classical political economy.     

Confidence and alternative Keynesian methods of asset choice

Abstract

This article elaborates the analysis of asset choice proposed by Keynes and later adopted by Post Keynesians such as Paul Davidson and Hyman Minsky. The article incorporates the essential aspects of the theory of confidence presented in Dequech (1999) Dequech, D. 1999. Expectations and confidence under uncertainty. Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 21: 415–430. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®] , [Google Scholar], first into an investigation of the relation between confidence and the liquidity premium and then into the broader theory of asset choice. Keynes considered two methods of determining planned investment expenditures: one method is based on the comparison between the marginal efficiency of capital and the interest rate; the other is based on the comparison between the demand price and the supply price of a particular capital good. Both methods can be generalized for asset choice, with investment as a particular case. The article refines and develops these two methods so as to specify more precisely the influence of confidence and speculation on the determination of liquidity premia and hence on the several assets' profitability.     

Rethinking the Theory of Money,Credit, and Macroeconomics: A Review Essay

ABSTRACT

This essay presents an overview and assessment of John Smithin's 2018 book Rethinking the Theory of Money, Credit, and Macroeconomics. Smithin continues the projects of Keynes and Minsky with the aim of providing a general account what how the macroeconomy actually works. The essay evaluates Smithin's alternative monetary model of the economy in the light of several key Post-Keynesian themes.     

The Economics of Pensions: A non-conventional approach

This paper examines two alternative pension systems, pay-as-you-go (PAYGS) and the capitalisation system (CS) in the light of alternative economic theories. It starts from a critical discussion of the insurance-fiction model of PAYGS proposed by Samuelson in 1958. The pros and cons of that model are illustrated by taking into consideration the non-orthodox views of Keynes, Lerner, Pechman, de Finetti and Eisner. Next, the paper investigates the relationship between CS and the marginalist capital theory. It is shown that, interpreted in a neoclassical framework, CS presents endogenous mechanisms of adjustment to demographic shocks. The problems of the transition between PAYGS and CS are then examined. The paper then discusses some main features of the current US policy debates on the Social Security system. Finally, the alleged advantages of a wider adoption of CS are criticised in the light of the Keynesian theory of effective demand reinforced by the Sraffian criticism of neoclassical capital theory.     

Keynes on State and Economic Development

ABSTRACT

This article has two purposes. On the one hand, it develops Keynes’s concept of economic development. On the other hand, it presents Keynes’s ideas about the role of State, chiefly the State Agenda. Keynes believed that the stage of economic development would only be attained if the State Agenda was in practice. In turn, to Keynes the economic development would be a stage in which the economic problems of society have been surpassed, and the motto of the individual behavior has been changed from the love of money to the love of living.     

The neglect of replacement investment in keynesian economics

Abstract

This article describes Keynes's early analysis of replacement investment and his subsequent neglect of the subject, especially by his followers. It goes on to explain how this deficiency helped to mislead later economists who attempted to use Keynes as a guide for economic policy and theory and the consequences of the errors of these economists.     

Keynes's Z function, heterogeneous output and marginal productivity

Keynes was adamant that the assumption of homogeneous outputand capital in macroeconomic theory is inadmissable. His aggregatesupply or Z function is a generalisation of Marshall's ordinarysupply function to take account of heterogeneous output, andis an essential element of the principle of effective demand.The ‘linear Z curve’ controversy can be attributedto Keynes's desire to demonstrate how his general monetary theoryof value and output encompasses the special case of Classicaltheory, including the marginal productivity theorem. The infamoussecond footnote on pages 55–6 of The General Theory canthereby be fully resolved.     

Marx and the Development of Critical Political Economy

Abstract

Although relevant analytical developments were provided over time by the critique of economic theory, they did not succeed in inhibiting the occurrence of a full-fledged revival of the neoclassical interpretation of capitalism. The development of critical economics and its capability of checking the influence of the dominant economic culture have been especially prejudiced by the failed integration between the analyses of Marx and Keynes. Following Keynes, once the ‘inducement to invest’ had been singled out as the central question for the explanation of output levels, one should have promptly acknowledged that on this very question Marx's analysis was significantly richer and more relevant than Keynes's—the richness and relevance of the former ultimately resting on the great attention Marx dedicated to the complex question of the influence of income distribution on the capitalists’ incentive to invest. It is argued in the article that through the study of this influence Marx succeeded in putting together the essential elements of a critical theory of effective demand, based on the principles and mechanisms that govern the distribution of income between profits and wages.