Sectoral Changes in Employment: An eclectic perspective on ‘good’ jobs and ‘poor’ jobs

The linkage Keynes established between the volume of employment that business firms require to make a particular number of jobs available provides an operational perspective about the way in which labor markets work. The aggregate supply or Z function is, in fact, a job offer curve. The most significant insight to derive from this curve is that job offers are inseparable from the economy's aggregate expenditure (or demand) level. This interdependency of aggregate supply and aggregate demand is necessary to understand the functioning of labor markets in the real world. This paper argues that a disaggregated model which encapsulates the economy's price-taking and price-making sectors offers a promising analytical tool to gain perspective about ‘good jobs’ and ‘poor jobs’ in post-Fordist economies. It is maintained that the sectoral deployment of workers reflects whether employing firms, as price-makers, can capture the increasing returns inherent in modern technology.     

Joan Robinson and the three cambridge revolutions

Joan Robinson's association with three Cambridge ‘revolutions’—imperfect competition, effective demand and capital theory—is examined in the context of her personal and intellectual partnership with Richard Kahn, John Maynard Keynes and Piero Sraffa. Initially, imperfect competition appeared to have successfully extended marginal analysis to all market forms. It also allowed Richard Kahn and Joan Robinson to persuade Keynes to present the main argument of The General Theory in terms of aggregate demand and aggregate supply. By the early 1950s, however, Joan Robinson had rejected the Marshallian methodology and had become a strenuous censor of neoclassical theory. In this paper the origin of her critique is traced to her reading of Sraffa's Introduction to Ricardo's Principles.     

MONETARY ANTICIPATONS AND THE DEMAND FOR MONEY SOME UK EVIDENCE*

The Carr-Darby ‘shock-absorber’ hypothesis, that unanticipated changes in the money supply influence the demand for real money balances but anticipated changes do not, is tested on UK data for narrow money, M1. For comparison with earlier studies on US data we take the (real first order) partial adjustment model as one example of a ‘conventional’ demand for money function. However the Carr-Darby hypothesis is also tested taking a more general autoregressive distributed lag model as the ‘conventional’ demand function. For both ‘conventional’ demand for money functions we find that the shock-absorber hypothesis is not supported for M1 using UK data.     

The Point of Effective Demand

Abstract

Keynes's principle of effective demand conceives competitive equilibrium in terms of the choices of entrepreneurs, investors and consumers, rather than of the optimal allocation of factors of production. In The General Theory, effective demand is distinguished from aggregate demand and from income, expected or realised, and there is no suggestion that equilibrium means the convergence of expectations. Reconsideration of Keynes's use of time and equilibrium periods leads to the conclusion that he treats employment as in continuous equilibrium, at the point of effective demand, determined by the state of expectation, the correctness of which is strictly irrelevant. The nature of the equilibrium represented by the point of effective demand is here described, not in terms of the multiplier, but in terms of the continuous equilibrium of supply and demand in short-term forward markets. This reading is faithful to Keynes's conception of aggregate demand as dependent upon the expectations of entrepreneurs, and it resolves the meaning of his ‘long-period employment.’ Formal appendices identify the differences between Keynes and Walras and the nature of the multiplier. The paper concludes that the Keynesian cross and ‘Swedish’ analysis should be abandoned, and the Walrasian conception recognised as only the limiting case of general competitive equilibrium in a monetary economy.     

Effective Demand: Securing the Foundations

Abstract

This paper is one of three contributions to a symposium commenting on papers previously published by the other authors. Allain (Allain, O. (2009) Effective demand and short-term adjustments in the General Theory, Review of Political Economy, 21, pp. 1–22) argues that Keynes elides a distinction between aggregate demand and global expenditure that is necessary to explain the formation of price expectations by individual entrepreneurs. Allain's conclusions depend upon redefinitions of aggregate and effective demand and the consumption function. Hartwig (Hartwig, J. (2007) Keynes vs. the Post Keynesians on the principle of effective demand, European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 14, pp. 725–739) argues that entrepreneurs must take into account the state of the economy as a whole, in order to form price expectations independently and not as a market equilibrium determined by aggregate supply and demand. This leaves demand price expectations to be determined outside the principle of effective demand. Neither author does full justice to Keynes's own treatment. We still need to agree by what mechanism individual entrepreneurs form a collective and mutually consistent state of expectation in The General Theory.     

Explaining the aggregate price level with Keynes's principle of effective demand

The mainstream view of Keynes's principle of effective demand is that it states something about quantities—and about quantities only. The principle is held to determine the levels of output and employment in a world not governed by Say's law. This paper argues that the principle of effective demand goes beyond this to explain not only ‘real’ activity levels but also the aggregate price level. A variant of the post-Keynesian D/Z-model is brought together with Marxian reproduction schemes to derive this result.     

The Keynesian Features of Graziani's Monetary Theory of Production and Some Unresolved Issues

Abstract

The aim of this article is twofold. First, it seeks to verify the elements of affinity between Graziani's approach to the Monetary Theory of Production and Keynes’ Treatise on Money and his General Theory. It is shown that two important theoretical elements, from the Treatise on Money, enter Graziani's basic schema, namely the view of endogenous money supply and the distribution process. At the same time, uncertainty and aggregate demand—conceived as a crucial variable in the General Theory—can play a significant role in the basic schema of the Monetary Theory of Production. Second, the article sets out a critical reconstruction of Graziani's basic schema emphasising the existence of ‘open issues’– such as bank behaviour and the ‘paradox of profits’—relating to internal and external inconsistencies.     

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.     

The Short Period and the Long Period in Macroeconomics: An Awkward Distinction

The aim of this paper is to show that the meaning of the well-known concepts of short period and long period is often unclear and may be seriously misleading when applied to macroeconomic analysis. Evidence of this confusion emerges through reappraisal of the interpretative debate of the 1980s and 1990s, which aimed to establish whether Keynes's General Theory should be considered a short- or long-period analysis of the aggregate level of production. Further evidence is provided by the ambiguous use that seems to be made of this distinction in macroeconomics textbooks, as will be shown in the paper. Having explored some possible explanations for the difficulties in defining and applying these methodological tools at a ‘macro’ level, the conclusion is drawn that it would be preferable to abandon this terminology in classifying different aggregate models and simply to make explicit the given factors and the independent and dependent variables in each model, exactly as Keynes did in Chapter 18 of his major work.     

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.     

Teaching Keynes’s Principle of Effective Demand within the Real Wage vs. Employment Space

This paper reviews several models for teaching Keynes’s principle of effective demand with a special focus on a framework that is familiar to advanced undergraduate students of macroeconomics: the real wage vs. employment space. It is argued that existing approaches to teaching Keynes’s principle of effective demand reflect a tension between two goals: being true to Keynes and translating the effective-demand principle into a story about real wages and employment within a single graphical space. Our main contribution consists of presenting an extended version of a model originally proposed by Lavoie (Rev Radic Polit Econ, 35(2):166–182, 2003), which seems to be a reasonable compromise between these two goals.     

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.     

Jeremy Bentham and Adam Smith on the usury laws: a ‘Smithian’ reply to Bentham and a new problem

Adam Smith justified the contemporary usury laws and was severely criticised by Bentham and most modern writers with the important exception of J.M. Keynes. We argue that pace Bentham, Smith did not intend to preclude loan financing of all ‘risky’ ventures and give a ‘monopoly’ to safe investments and did not neglect the potential emergence of black credit markets. Yet Smith ought to have modified his position independently of Bentham's criticism, considering a marked rise in the rate at which governments borrowed in the late 1770s.     

The NAIRU reconsidered: why labour market deregulation may raise unemployment

According to the mainstream theory of equilibrium unemployment, persistent unemployment is caused mainly by ‘excessive’ labour market regulation, whereas aggregate demand, capital accumulation and technological progress have no lasting effect on unemployment. We show that the mainstream non‐accelerating inflation rate of unemployment (NAIRU) model is a special case of a general model of equilibrium unemployment, in which aggregate demand, investment and endogenous technological progress do have long‐term effects. It follows that labour market deregulation does not necessarily reduce steady‐inflation unemployment. Theoretically, if the decline in real wage growth claims owing to deregulation is smaller than the ensuing decline in labour productivity growth and in the warranted real wage growth, then in that case steady‐inflation unemployment may increase. Empirical evidence for 20 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries (1984–1997) indicates that the impact of labour market deregulation on OECD unemployment is zero, and possibly negative (causing a higher rate of unemployment).     

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.     

Involuntary unemployment: the missing piece in Keynes's General Theory *

Using a retrospective methodology, my paper examines critically the insights on involuntary unemployment offered by Keynes in his General Theory. Keynes, it is argued, gave involuntary unemployment a modern micro-founded definition yet — quite opportunely, in view of the difficulty of the task—did not attempt to provide a direct microeconomic explanation of it Rather, his claim to the demonstration of its existence rests on an indirect argument, where involuntary unemployment emerges at the corollary of effective demand falling short of its full employment level. This justification is based on the more or less tacit assumption that involuntary unemployment and effective demand-deficiency are equivalent. This claim of equivalence, it will be argued, is wanting. Hence the view that involuntary unemployment may have been demonstrated through the proxy of demand-deficiency falls. My paper evaluates whether Keynes's other arguments in favour of involuntary unemployment are robust. Several alternative interpretations of his General TheoryChapter Two ‘fundamental observation’, focusing respectively on money illusion, adjustment flaws, and resistance to cuts in nominal wages, are discussed. Here also the verdict will be negative. The general conclusion then follows that no solid explanation for the existence of involuntary unemployment is to be found in theGeneral 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 modern foundations of Marx's monetary economics

The first chapters of Capital are still often ‘tlerated’, Mirowski (1986: 222) reminds us, as a ‘regrettable metaphysical residuum of [Max's] Hegelian [past]’. Such ‘tolerance’ has unfortunate consequences, howeve, not the least of which is Marx's reputation for ‘theoretical metallism’, simple and derivative. This paper builds on the recent efforts of de Brunhoff (1981), Lavoie (1983) and others to deconstruct, with support from Grundrisse and related texts, the important thrid chapter of Capital, Marx's account of the universal equivalent's four functions. As it is identified here, the chapter's core includes ‘pody-Keynesian’ elements– a reversal of the Ricardian view of the quantity equation, an effective demand principle in which capitalists’ dcisions about the recommitment of hoards assume a prominent role, and the deermination of interest rates, in the short term, on the basis of liquidity preference-– but does not include, in the conventional sense, a commodity theory of money.     

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.     

Keynes and the international monetary system: Time for a tabular standard?

This paper discusses proposals for tabular standards in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. In particular, we focus on Keynes’ proposal for an international tabular standard (ITS) as the gold standard unravelled in the 1930s. The paper explains the origins of Keynes’ ITS proposal which pegged the value of an international reserve to a broad index of primary commodities, weighted in terms of their value in world production. We argue that the ITS should be viewed as an important and enduring component of Keynes’ ideal long-run vision for anchoring the international monetary system, even post-Bretton Woods.