Rethinking the Keynesian Revolution
I'm reviewing Tyler Beck Goodspeed's book for The Review of Political Economy, and... boy, I think this is going to be fun! Some initial quotes:
"since the merger of Irving Fisherwith Walrasian general equilibrium, by Robert Lucas and the 'New Classicals,' all mainstream schools of macroeconomic thought... have adhered to a Walrasian approach" (p. 2).
"not only did Keynes and Hayek both adhere to the Wicksellian approach, but also... the Wicksell 'connection' was, as a result, responsible for a fundamental convergence of their respective theories of money, capital, and the business cycle during the course of the 1930s" (p. 3)
"Money, therefore, is intimately related to the second element of the Wicksell connection, namely, the identification of intertemporal coordination as the central problem in macroeconomics" (p. 6). (As I noted.)
"Critical to the Wicksellian approach, therefore, is the notion that producers, consumers, and investors need not be acting on the basis of mutually consistent expectations" (p. 7)
I'm going to get through this one fast, I suspect!
"since the merger of Irving Fisherwith Walrasian general equilibrium, by Robert Lucas and the 'New Classicals,' all mainstream schools of macroeconomic thought... have adhered to a Walrasian approach" (p. 2).
"not only did Keynes and Hayek both adhere to the Wicksellian approach, but also... the Wicksell 'connection' was, as a result, responsible for a fundamental convergence of their respective theories of money, capital, and the business cycle during the course of the 1930s" (p. 3)
"Money, therefore, is intimately related to the second element of the Wicksell connection, namely, the identification of intertemporal coordination as the central problem in macroeconomics" (p. 6). (As I noted.)
"Critical to the Wicksellian approach, therefore, is the notion that producers, consumers, and investors need not be acting on the basis of mutually consistent expectations" (p. 7)
I'm going to get through this one fast, I suspect!
Huh.
ReplyDelete