Comment on the paper by Prof. H. Kurz: Accumulation, Distribution and the Keynesian Hypothesis.

Steindl, Josef

Bibliographic data

Works

Document type:: Works

Collection:: Josef Steindl Collection

Title:: Comment on the paper by Prof. H. Kurz: Accumulation, Distribution and the Keynesian Hypothesis.: Preliminary draft

Author:: Steindl, Josef

Scope:: Typoskript, 2 Blätter

Year of publication:: 1985

Language:: English

Note:: Zusatz zum Titel fingiert. - Kommentar im Rahmen der Conference on Sraffa's Production of Commodities, Florence, 24-27 August 1985.

Topic:: Economic history,economic theory,current developments

JEL Classification:: E12 [General Aggregative Models: Keynes, Keynesian, Post-Keynesian]

Shelfmark:: S/M.65.4

DOI:: https://doi.org/10.48671/nls.js.AC14446309

2 a"long term equilibrium" which evidently is meant to be indpendent of whatever happens in the short run ( see p.5: "fluctuations in aggregate demand have no role to play in the definition of long period positions of the economy".) To my mind this long period position is a truly mythical concept It is stated that the"actuel position of the economy " will not ever get very close to the "relevant long term position How would one get at it statistically? Or in any way at all? I can't guess. Finally I want to ask a rather unkind question. If neoRicardians ever contemplate practical problems of economic policy in terms of their theory, do they find it very easy to differentiate themselves from the neo-classicists whom they attack so strongly on a purely theoretical plane? Does not the exclusion of the effective demand from the long term theory bring them into close vicinity of the supply siders? And if long term unemployment is not a matter of effective demand (which"has no role to play" ) are t^e neo Ricardians not in close company with those (including Ricardo himself and for all I know also Marx) who maintain that it is due to high wages? Finally, is the concept of a long term position which is independent of short term events ( including, I suppose, fiscal or monetary and other policy measures) not very much in line with the rational expectationists view that economic policy does not matter in the long run because the economy goes its own way and is only temporarily perturbed by what the economic policy makers do?

Works

Cite and reuse

Works

Image

Image fragment

Citation links

Citation recommendation