Hayek and the Great Depression of 1929: Did he really change his mind?

The aim of this research is to establish whether, and if so in what way, Hayek changed his mind about the Great Depression of 1929.The work is divided into two parts. In the first part, I present the ‘early’ Hayek of the 1930s. Hayek was the great rival of Keynes. Both explained the Great Depression, applying opposing business cycle theories. For Keynes, the crisis was caused by an excess of saving over investment; for Hayek, on the contrary, by an excess of investment over saving. In the early 1930s, Röpke attempted a synthesis, positing that a recession due to overinvestment can degenerate, as in 1929, into a depression caused by oversaving. Hayek examined and rejected Röpke's theory. In the second part, I present the ‘later’ Hayek of the 1970s. After years of silence and solitude, Hayek was unexpectedly awarded the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economics, precisely for the contribution he made in the 1930s to the theory of the business cycle. Hayek returned to his pursuit of the ghost of Keynes, debated with his friend and rival Friedman, re-examined Röpke's special case and, according to Haberler, changed his mind. In my conclusion, I attempt to resolve the dilemma.     

Kalecki on money and finance

It is argued that Kalecki had a greater appreciation of the role of the monetary sector than has been generally recognized, and that Kalecki presented ideas which can be seen as now embedded in the structuralist post Keynesian analysis of endogenous money and in the circuitist approach. Six key features of Kalecki's monetary analysis are identified. The paper outlines Kalecki's dismissal of the ‘Pigou effect’ and the ‘Keynes effect’, and then discussion the relationship between the ‘principle of increasing risk’ and the nature of the supply of credit. It discusses interest determination in Kalecki's writings and the manner in which he distinguished different types of money.     

The Comparative Statics of Effective Demand

Keynes introduces the term ‘effective demand’ in Chapter 3 of the General Theory as designating the point of intersection of two functions: the ‘aggregate demand function’ (D) and the ‘aggregate supply function’ (Z). For the first time in the literature, I here use specific functional forms for the D and Z functions and run numerical simulations which allow study of the comparative statics of the model in the face of various ‘shocks’. The demonstration of how the D/Z model actually works will hopefully prove useful for future students of the economics of Keynes.     

Schumpeter’s new combinations

The paper focuses attention on Schumpeter’s achievements in his classic contribution and how these relate to the contributions of other major authors. While deeply indebted to Marx’s vision of capitalism as a system incessantly in travail, Schumpeter was no ‘Marxist’. He shared B?hm’s view that profits are not due to ‘exploitation’, but thought that the latter’s attack on Marx was a failure. There are remarkable differences, but also similarities between the analyses of Schumpeter and Keynes. Marx, Schumpeter and Keynes rejected Say’s law and other basic ideas constituting the marginalist doctrine. They saw capitalism as a restless, crisis-prone system.     

On Britain's Return to the Gold Standard: Was there a ‘Pigou–McKenna School’?

It is common to refer to the ‘Keynes–McKenna school’ in opposition to Britain's return to the gold standard. However, after considering A.C. Pigou's reading of Sir Reginald McKenna's testimony to the Chamberlain–Bradbury Committee and the influence of that reading on Pigou's draft of the Committee's report to the British government, the case is made for the ‘Pigou–McKenna school’ as a policy school that was supportive of a return to the gold standard but against doing so prematurely. This is perhaps more meaningful than reference to the ‘Keynes–McKenna school’, which incorrectly implies that McKenna was opposed to Britain returning to gold.     

‘Socialization of Investment’ and ‘Euthanasia of the Rentier’: the Relevance of Keynesian policy ideas for the contemporary US Economy

This paper builds from two explicit policy ideas that Keynes introduced in the General Theory, a ‘somewhat comprehensive socialization of investment’, and ‘the euthanasia of the rentier’. The paper argues that, to a significant degree, the stagnation of the contemporary US economy can be attributed to the nature of its capital-market based, or ‘exit led’ financial system, which promotes short-termism, speculation and financial fragility, as well as excessive political power for the rentier class. In combination, these factors also diminish governments' capacity to successfully implement policies that promote egalitarian growth and full employment. In making these points, I contrast the US financial system with the bank-based or ‘voice led’ systems, such as those in Japan, France or South Korea. The paper then sketches a series of policy proposals which would address these problems. These proposals include regulatory policies which would ‘level the playing field upward’ among all financial intermediaries, and credit allocation policies that give preference to projects with high social rates of return. The proposals also aim to substantially increase the degree of democratic accountability within the financial system.     

Keynes,Ricardo and the classical theory of interest

Keynes made harsh and repeated attacks on the work of Ricardo, blaming him particulary for what Keynes called the ‘classical theory’ of interest. Garegnani and others argue that Keynes' criticisms of the classical theory of interest apply to later neoclassical writers, but not to Ricardo. This paper re-examines Keynes' criticisms. It argues that Keynes attacked Ricardoapos;s theory of interest despite his awareness that Ricardo did not hold the ‘classical theory’. Moreover, Keynes not only expressed sympathy for Ricardo's understanding of interest, but his criticisms which do apply to Ricardo do not address Ricardo's theory of interest.     

Logic,rationality and knowledge in Ramsey's thought: reassessing ‘human logic’

This paper reconsiders Frank Ramsey's essay on subjective probability (1926) as a consistent way to articulate logic, rationality and knowledge. The first part of the essay builds an axiomatic theory of subjective probability based on ‘formal logic’, defining rationality as choice-consistency. The second part seems to open up different horizons: the evaluation of degrees of belief by ‘human logic’. Because of the interest Keynes (1931) had taken in ‘human logic’, it was considered to be a possible alternative to the formal logic underlying the neoclassical theory of individual behaviour. The analysis of Ramsey's method in the entire paper, the relation between logic and rationality it constructs and the conception of uncertainty it reveals, lead me to note on the contrary that Ramsey's human logic was a complementary logic rather than an alternative to formal logic. Defining a standard to evaluate beliefs formation according to a frequentist criterion, it completes a normative representation of rationality which supports an original theory of knowledge that appears more in line with further developments of neoclassical methodology than with Keynesian economics.     

Institutionalism and the “Common Man” Through the Lens of Philip Klein: Business Cycles,the Public Sector,and Keynes’s Economics

This article reviews and assesses Philip Klein’s work on business cycles and macroeconomics, the public sector, and the economics of John Maynard Keynes. The article makes several findings. First, Klein built on the pioneering efforts of Wesley Mitchell to advance the development of cycle indicators and to outline an eclectic theory of cycles that remains useful for synthesizing a broad literature. Second, Klein’s essays on macroeconomics contain enduring discussions of the malleability of the “natural” rate of unemployment and the value of a behavioral approach to expectations. Third, he refocused the institutionalist attention on the public sector by introducing “higher efficiency” and other concepts to help explain how government policy plays a role in economic life. Fourth, Klein emphasized the role of fiscal policy in moderating business cycles. Fifth, his work points in the direction of today’s post-Keynesian institutionalism, both by stressing that Keynes was “profoundly institutionalist” in his approach and by arguing that conjoining Keynes and institutionalism would provide a stronger foundation for macroeconomic theory and policy.     

Keynes’ Preface to the German Edition of the General Theory: Nazi Sympathies or Methodological Empathies?

In the (1936) preface to the German edition of The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money, Keynes contrasts his methodology with that of Classical laissez-faire economics. He also compares and contrasts his methodology with German economics, which members of the German Historical School had heavily influenced. Unfortunately, some view Keynes as arguing in this Preface that his theory could more deductively apply to fascism than to laissez-faire economies. This would suggest an endorsement of Nazism. Of course, any support offered for Nazism should be condemned. However, instead of displaying Nazi sympathies, this paper argues that the Preface more likely supports the widespread methodological rejection in German economics of deducing laissez-faire outcomes from Classical postulates. Furthermore, Keynes criticizes the more inductive approach of many German economists, and states that he provides them with the theoretical framework which they could deductively apply to their totalitarian economy. Keynes should be read as arguing that his theoretical framework would prove more applicable to a totalitarian system than would a theory based on Classical laissez-faire economics. Comments in the Preface which seem to some to support Nazism should be taken, then, as support for the applicability of his theory to such a system. Keynes’ methodological arguments in the prefaces to the other editions, which reflect his overall methodological approach in the General Theory, his familiarity with German economics, his support for liberal economic and political institutions, and his anti-Nazism, all support this alternative interpretation. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Midwest Economics Association Meetings in Chicago on March 16, 2008.     

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.     

Keynes's last time at the Political Economy Club: Editorial Introduction

Maynard Keynes died on Easter Morning 1946. Since 1937, he hadbeen a sick man but had nevertheless carried a huge load duringthe war years in the Treasury. There, he advised and workedon wartime finances and represented Britain through the Treasuryat Bretton Woods and     

An account of the Washington Lend Lease negotiations 1944 by E. A. G. Robinson

In September 1944, John Maynard Keynes set sail for Washingtonwhere Keynes was to be a key negotiator in the talks leadingup to Stage II of Lend Lease. Accompanying him and his wifewas Keynes's colleague and friend, E. A. G. (Austin) Robinson.Robinson's role was to be Head of Programmes Division for theMinistry of Production. While Keynes would deal with Harry Whiteand Henry Morgenthau, Robinson was involved with the underlyingproduction of a case for the urgent financial needs of war-timeBritain. Robinson saw the tensions at all levels of daily lifeand he recorded his demanding times in a series of letters hometo his wife, Joan Robinson. These letters are published herefor the first time.     

From free oil to ‘freedom oil’: terrorism,war and US Geopolitics in the Persian Gulf

Oil has been a major driving force behind foreign interests, regional and domestic balance of power, and territorial conflicts in the Persian Gulf. As a result of the ‘9/11’ terrorist attacks debates on oil and the United States' security agenda have significantly shifted. If on one side, those opposing US military interventionism have argued that the ‘war on terror’ provided one more convenient cover for a renewed ‘imperialist oil grab’ in this region; on the other, links between oil and terrorism pointed at problems of governance in oil-producing countries. As the ‘war on terror’ became justified as a ‘war of liberation’ against oil-funded dictators, the US portrayed its foreign policy as shifting from ensuring free access to oil for the world market, to ensuring that oil is delivering ‘freedom’ to local populations. Although engaging the crucial issue of oil governance, there is yet little evidence given the number of war victims and potential vested interests that a US policy shift from ‘free oil’ to ‘freedom oil’ is genuine and viable.     

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     

The concept of maturity and the transformation of economic systems

In economics, ‘maturity’ essentially means that an economic system (or part of a system) is ripe to be transformed into something else or heading towards decline. In Josef Steindl's economic thinking the concept of maturity, by which he means a stage of development where the economy becomes unable to fully realize its output potential, occupies a central place. Whereas for Steindl the main causes of such maturity are endogenous, other economists such as Schumpeter, Sombart, Hilferding, Keynes, and Hansen consider stagnation to be caused primarily by exogenous factors. Various concepts and causes of maturity are compared. Contrary to expectations based on these concepts, economic development after the Great Depression has not been characterized by stagnation or transition to planned economy. Instead, the dynamics of innovation were strong enough to prevent the economy from becoming ‘mature’. It appears that the actual course of events can be better explained within Steindl's concept of maturity.     

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.     

Market forms and effective demand: Keynesian results with perfect competition ∗

In recent years there has been a flourishing of models with microfoundations based on imperfect (or monopolistic) competition that claim to yield Keynesian results which, it is held, are incompatible with perfect competi-tion. The paper shows that Keynes’s results do not depend on market forms but are contingent on his treatment of investment. In Keynes’s analysis, the existence of underemployment equilibria is demonstrated regardless of the assumed market form. Far from taking into account the importance of investment, recent models with ‘Keynesian results’ ignore investment altogether.

The article argues that if the investment demand function, with its distinctive characteristics, is removed, involuntary unemployment can be explained only by imperfections or rigidities that prevent producers from pushing their supply up to the level of full employment. A conclusion that Keynes wanted to avoid.

The introduction of a hypothesis of market forms different from imperfect competition may be useful in order to develop macroeconomics along more realistic lines, however, as the conclusions of the paper suggest, this hypothesis loses its analytical power if made separately from a satisfactory treatment of investment.     

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.