History and Methods of Post-Keynesian Macroeconomics

1727 days ago, 552 views
PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Diagram. 1A. We set post-Keynesian financial aspects inside of an arrangement of numerous heterodox schools of thought, contrary to standard schools. 1B. We recognize the primary components (presuppositions) of heterodoxy, differentiating them to those of orthodoxy.2. We go over a brief history of post-Keynesian financial matters, specifically its establishing institutional moments.3. We distinguish the extra components that chara

Presentation Transcript

Slide 1

History and Methods of Post-Keynesian Macroeconomics Marc Lavoie University of Ottawa

Slide 2

Outline 1A. We set post-Keynesian financial aspects inside an arrangement of numerous heterodox schools of thought, contrary to standard schools. 1B. We distinguish the primary components (presuppositions) of heterodoxy, differentiating them to those of conventionality. 2. We go over a short history of post-Keynesian financial matters, specifically its establishing institutional minutes. 3. We distinguish the extra elements that portray present Keynesian financial aspects relative on firmly related heterodox schools. 4. We outline the different surges of post-Keynesian financial aspects: Fundamentalism, Kaleckian, Kaldorian, Sraffian, Institutionalist. 5. We examine the development of post-Keynesian financial aspects, and some of its vital works in the course of the most recent 40 years. 6. We say a portion of the level headed discussions that have shaken post-Keynesian financial aspects.

Slide 3

PART I Heterodox schools

Slide 4


Slide 5


Slide 6

Orthodox versus Heterodox financial matters Post-Keynesian financial matters is one of various heterodox schools of financial matters. Heterodox business analysts are nonconformists in financial aspects. Dispute is a more extensive idea than heterodoxy. One can recognize standard protesters and heterodox nonconformists. Conventional dissidents may get to be distinctly heterodox protesters; or standard nonconformists may get to be standard; or they may stay customary nonconformists. Heterodox dissidents are probably not going to wind up standard. Their position in the pecking request will dependably be shaky.

Slide 7

Examples of customary nonconformists Milton Friedman in the 1950s (got to be standard in the late 1960s) The New Consensus see (has ended up standard in national banks) Bénassy/Malinvaud (disequilibrium Keynesianism) in the 1970s H.A. Simon, Coase, Akerlof, Stiglitz New Institutionalism Post-Walrasian financial matters (à la Colander), multi-operator demonstrating, behavioral financial aspects, exploratory financial matters

Slide 8

Heterodox schools in financial matters Post-Keynesians Sraffians (Neo-Ricardians) ? Circuitists, Berlin school of money related financial matters Marxists, Radicals Structuralists (Development, Latin-American school, Furtado, L. Taylor)) French Regulation School, Social Structure of Accumulation (SSA) Institutionalists (Old) Social financial matters and Humanistic financial matters Anti-Utilitarism (MAUSS) Economists of « conventions » Schumpeterians and Evolutionary Economics Feminist financial matters Ecologists (Ecological Economics) … . Also, undoubtedly numerous others (Ghandi financial matters, Henry George, Gesell, Neo-Austrains, and so forth.)

Slide 9

What do all these heterodox schools have in like manner? Contrasts between schools of thought and their relative positioning have a considerable measure to do with the humanism of the calling. Still, as I would see it there are expansive elements that describe heterodox and customary schools. These are known as the presuppositions of research projects by rationalists of science: they are things that can't be addressed

Slide 10

The forms of Post-Keynesianism One of the troublesome question, that will concern us at all circumstances, is to recognize the correct substance of post-Keynesianism. Ought to the Sraffians be incorporated? Are the post-Keynesians part of the Regulation school or is the Regulation school some portion of post-Keynesianism? What are the connections between post-Keynesians and Radical Marxists? Shapes change with time and with the people included. To some degree, names are fundamentally self-assertive. Actually, I lean toward a « broad church » approach.

Slide 11

Schools of thought and radiating powers versus centripetal strengths Centrifugal powers Explosion of papers Hyper-specialization Product separation Individualities, discusses over unimportant issues, differences Centripetal powers Rapprochements, associations Minorities in danger, scholarly interest Organizations (ICAPE, AHE, SHE, PEF)

Slide 12

Presuppositions of the heterodox program versus those of the standard

Slide 13

An illustration: Reasonable objectivity versus hyper levelheadedness in different heterodox schools Reasonable sanity, in light of propensities (PK, traditions) Instrumental judiciousness, the difficulty of managing all the data (Herbert Simon), epistemic vulnerability Non-ergodicity (Davidson, Shackle), ontological instability Ecological sanity (in brain science) Non-compensatory decisions (in natural financial aspects, and advertising)

Slide 14

PART II History of post-Keynesian financial matters

Slide 15

Key crossroads in the historical backdrop of PK Macroeconomics The Circus, before 1936 and the GT. JR: Introduction to the hypothesis of work (1937) JR: The Accumulation of capital (1956) and Kaldor's article on pay conveyance (1956) The Capital discussions, 1960s and mid 1970s, with Harcourt's record (1969, 1972) The acknowledgment by S. Weintraub (1961) that he and Cambridge writers had similar perspectives on value swelling and cash endogeneity The visit of JR to the United States in December 1971 The Eichner and Kregel article in JEL 1975 The establishing of the CJE and the JPKE in 1977 and 1978, and of ROPE in 1989. The Trieste Summer school, 1980-1992 Great Malvern ROPE gatherings (1987-1996) and the Post Keynesian Conferences and Summer schools, Knoxville and Kansas City, 1988-2008

Slide 16

The Circus, before 1936 and the GT, and JR's Introduction to the hypothesis of work (1937) Keynes' banana anecdote, dowager's cruse 1929 Keynes' General Theory 1936 The Revolutionary character of the GT, underlined by the Circus and J. Robinson Kalecki: 1933 (cycle), 1937 (rule of expanding risk),1939 (genuine wages), 1942 (A hypothesis of benefits) Kaldor 1934: various equilibria, flimsiness, way reliance

Slide 17

JR: The Accumulation of capital (1956) and Kaldor's article on pay dispersion (1956) The Accumulation of capital: Greatest book, that covers the element long-run ramifications of Keynes, propelled by Harrod, Kalecki, Myrdal, the recovery of traditional inquiries', first experience with Ricardo's Principles, Wicksell (Kahn): development, decision of procedure, cash A neo-Keynesian or Cambridge hypothesis of wage appropriation, in view of macroeconomics, rather than minimal efficiency First mindfulness that the hypothesis being talked about at Cambridge is not the same as that in the US.

Slide 18

The Capital debates, 1960s and mid 1970s, with Harcourt's record (1969, 1972) Robinson's 1953-4 article on the generation work. Sraffa's 1926 article on the state of Marshallian cost bends. Sraffa's 1960 book (which few caught on). The UK Cambridge take a shot at settled coefficients display had some identical representation in the MIT Cambridge chip away at movement examination, likewise in view of settled coefficients Robinson, Garegnani, 1961, visit MIT and Samuelson (1962) answers JR's reactions [« for quite a while, everybody (aside from Piero Garegnani) was fairly baffled» ] QJE symposium 1966, Samuelson backtracks: thrashing is yielded The rate of profit for capital can't be a measure of its « scarcity ». Harcourt's JEL 1969 record of the contentions. The Italo-Cambridge school: Full mindfulness that it constitutes a school of thought not the same as « Bastard Keynesianism ». Mid 1970s: pinnacle of Sraffian's impact, as a substitute for orthdodox Marxism and the neoclassical standard.

Slide 19

Weintraub interfaces up with the UK Cambridge In 1958 Weintraub composes a book that splits far from the neoclassical union. In 1961 he understands that his perspectives on value swelling (cost expansion) and cash (endogenous cash, dismissal of the amount hypothesis of cash) are reliable with those of Robinson and Cambridge (Kahn/Kaldor declarations at the Radcliffe Committee). In the long run he will understand that his conditions are like those of Kalecki (the KKR Kalecki-Kaldor-Robinson eq.) He connects up with Cambridge. Kregel, an understudy of Davidson, learns at Cambridge, 1969-. Davidson, a previous graduate understudy of Weintraub, spends a holiday at Cambridge in 1970-1971, conveying there the draft of his book, Money and the Real World (1972). Basil Moore was likewise going by Cambridge that year.

Slide 20

The visit of JR to the United States in December 1971 This is another key minute, as Robinson's address at the 1971 AEA, whose President was J.K. Galbraith, give a catalyst to non-Radical heterodox financial analysts in the USA to sort out themselves. This was principally done under the initiative of Alfred Eichner ( The Megacorp and the Oligopoly, 1976; A Guide to Post-Keynesian Economics , 1979) A book, altered by Edward Nell (1980), in the end left the 1971 AEA meeting, subtitled, Essays in the Revival of Political Economy Kregel's book 1973: The Reconstruction of Political Economy. Hyman P. Minsky, 1975: John Maynard Keynes , or money related Keynesianism, or Wall Street Keynesianism

Slide 21

The Eichner and Kregel article in JEL 1975 Eichner and Kregel assert that another Paradigm has been conceived, called Post-Keynesian financial aspects. They abridge the new school with the accompanying attributes: A worry with development and cycles; A worry with history and time; A neo-Keynesian/institutional hypothesis of salary conveyance; Incomplete data, essential vulnerability; Imperfect markets with oligopolies, and steady minimal expenses; An adapted generation economy; Saving changes with optional consumptions (speculation); Purpose: to clarify this present reality as watched observationally.

Slide 22

The establishing of the CJE and the JPKE in 1977 and 1978 The standardization of PK financial matters proceeded with the making of no less than two diaries. The Cambridge Journal of Economics , made by youthful researchers at Cambridge, established on the convention of Marx, Keynes, Kalecki, Robinson and Kald