Search

In the past twenty years, there has been considerable debate on the "coherence" of post Keynesian economics, in view of post Keynesian economists' ambitions to develop a paradigmatic alternative to neoclassical economics. Given the growing importance of methodological aspects in this discussion, this article addresses the differences of approach to economic theory between the fathers of the two most important strands in post Keynesian economics. We thus focus on Keynes's criticism of Kalecki's theory of the business cycle and the tensions between Keynes's logical approach and Kaleki's formal modeling. We show that in criticizing Kalecki's theory, Keynes made use of the same methodological criticism (based on detecting logical fallacies in reasoning) he had employed to attack both the classical theory and contemporary "pseudomathematical" models. After illustrating these fundamental differences between Keynes and Kalecki about the proper way of doing economics, we draw some conclusions on the possible future evolution of post Keynesian economics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Weisskopfian approach has dominated empirical studies of the US rate of profit for the last thirty-five years. Forty-five years earlier, Michal Kalecki developed a different frame suitable for empirical profit rate studies, which had the potential to give different, but complementary, insight into the profit rate analysis based on the Weisskopfian approach. This paper first presents a development of the Kaleckian frame. It then applies this frame to the US economy and presents some preliminary empirical results. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This is a short note on the limits of Varieties of Capitalism and the potential of the Keynes-Kalecki approach proposed by Baccaro and Pontusson for overcoming them. It identifies the main problem as a failure to define capitalism itself. This effectively reduces the approach to a comparison of the U.S. and German economies at the end of the 20th century. It is in particular unable to recognize let alone explain the very different U.S. economic system in the immediate postwar decades or how the more recent emphasis on the market emerged to take its place. The promise of the Keynes-Kalecki approach is that it will overcome these limits, but the promise has not yet been realized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper examines the 'utilisation controversy' around the Kaleckian model of growth and distribution. We show that the Federal Reserve data on capacity utilisation, which have been used by both sides of this debate, are the wrong kind of data for the issue under examination. Instead, a more appropriate measurement can be derived from the data on the average workweek of capital. We argue that the long-run dynamic adjustment, proposed by Kaleckian scholars, lacks a coherent economic rationale. We provide an alternative path towards the endogeneity of the desired utilisation at the micro and macro levels. Finally, we examine the proposed adjustment mechanism econometrically. Our results verify the endogeneity of the normal utilisation rate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents a three-class growth model with labour market conflict. The classes are workers, a middle-management middle class and a ‘top’ management capitalist class. The model introduces personal income distribution that supplements conventional concerns with functional income distribution. Endogenously generated changes in personal income distribution can generate endogenous shifts from profit-led to wage-led regimes and vice versa. A three-class economy generates richer patterns of class conflict because the middle class has shared interests and conflicts with both capitalists and workers. Changes that benefit the middle class do not necessarily increase growth or employment or benefit workers. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Copyright of Cuadernos de Economia is the property of Universidad Catolica del Uruguay Damaso Antonio Larranaga and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

ABSTRACT Responding to the Classical criticism of the baseline Kaleckian growth model which is not fully adjusted in the long run, post-Kaleckians have proposed model variants that imply the economy to converge to a steady state in which the realized and the normal utilization rates as well as the realized and the expected secular rate of sales growth are congruent. Convergence is caused by endogenous adjustments of the conventional rates to their respective realized rates which is theoretically justified by hysteresis effects. Using a dynamic linear specification of the Kaleckian investment function in state-space form and by the aid of the Kalman filter, this paper studies the endogeneity of the normal utilization rate and the expected secular rate of sales growth empirically for the US manufacturing sector and its sub-sectors. We find evidence for an endogenous adjustment of both variables. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ABSTRACT This paper looks at how factor shares vary over the business cycle and how their movements fit into Kaleckian analysis. Heterodox accounts of factor-share movements include both profit-squeeze arguments (procyclical wage share) and underconsumption arguments (countercyclical wage share). Empirical evidence gives no decisive support for either account: factor shares may be procyclical and countercyclical at different stages of the business cycle. If factor shares vary in such a complex way, then Kaleckian models cannot have a stable distributive curve. The economy instead follows a distributive loop, with different adjustment paths during an upswing and a downswing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Cahiers d'Economie Politique is the property of Cahiers d'Economie Politique and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Cahiers d'Economie Politique is the property of Cahiers d'Economie Politique and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Cahiers d'Economie Politique is the property of Cahiers d'Economie Politique and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Cahiers d'Economie Politique is the property of Cahiers d'Economie Politique and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper deals with the influence of different types of government expenditure on growth in a post-Keynesian framework. The analysis considers a government sector with a balanced budget and an autonomous and non-linear investment function, interpreted along a Kaleckian and a Classical-Harrodian line. It shows under which conditions different types of government expenditure are beneficial or detrimental for economic growth, comparing some results with those reached by Barro in his 1990 Journal of Political Economy article, and points out the emergence of phenomena like multiple equilibria, hysteresis and low growth traps. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]