The Experts below are selected from a list of 240 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Jérôme De Boyer Des Roches - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • THE KEYNES-HARROD CONTROVERSY ON THE Classical Theory OF THE RATE OF INTEREST AND THE INTERDEPENDENCE OF MARKETS
    Journal of The History of Economic Thought, 2010
    Co-Authors: Jérôme De Boyer Des Roches
    Abstract:

    The aggregation of budget constraints of the enterprises and the households allows us to throw a new light on the controversy between Keynes and Harrod concerning the Classical Theory of the rate of interest. It appears that the critique of the Classical Theory that Keynes formulated does not presuppose the liquidity preference Theory; it is based on the multiplier Theory. We show that this critique is logically founded and that it is based upon the absence of the labour market in the analysis of the interdependence between the markets for financial assets and for goods. Harrod did not comprehend it completely. This explains one lacuna in the model of the General Theory that Harrod (1937) proposed. We show that it lacks an equation and that the equilibrium (hence the rate of interest) is indeterminate, which is not the case in the article by Hicks (1937). We conclude that if there is relevance in Keynes’s criticism of the Classical Theory, then similar a criticism can be directed at Keynes’s own Theory.

  • THE KEYNES-HARROD CONTROVERSY ON THE Classical Theory OF THE RATE OF INTEREST AND THE INTERDEPENDENCE OF MARKETS
    Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 2010
    Co-Authors: Jérôme De Boyer Des Roches
    Abstract:

    The aggregation of budget constraints of enterprises and households allows us to throw a new light on the controversy between Keynes and Harrod concerning the Classical Theory of the rate of interest. It appears that the critique of the Classical Theory that Keynes formulated does not presuppose the liquidity preference Theory; it is based on the multiplier Theory. We show that this critique is logically founded and that it is based upon the absence of the labor market in the analysis of the interdependence between the markets for financial assets and for goods. Harrod did not comprehend it completely. This explains one lacuna in the model of the General Theory that Harrod proposed in 1937. We show that it lacks an equation and that the equilibrium (hence the rate of interest) is indeterminate, which is not the case in the 1937 article by Hicks. We conclude that if there is relevance in Keynes’s criticism of the Classical Theory, then a similar criticism can be directed at Keynes’s own Theory.

David Andrews - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Keynes, Ricardo and the Classical Theory of interest
    The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought, 2000
    Co-Authors: David Andrews
    Abstract:

    Keynes made harsh and repeated attacks on the work of Ricardo, blaming him particulary for what Keynes called the ‘Classical Theory’ of interest. Garegnani and others argue that Keynes' criticisms of the Classical Theory of interest apply to later neoClassical writers, but not to Ricardo. This paper re-examines Keynes' criticisms. It argues that Keynes attacked Ricardoapos;s Theory of interest despite his awareness that Ricardo did not hold the ‘Classical Theory’. Moreover, Keynes not only expressed sympathy for Ricardo's understanding of interest, but his criticisms which do apply to Ricardo do not address Ricardo's Theory of interest.

Fabio Ravagnani - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • The Classical Theory of Normal Prices and the Analysis of Economic Changes: A Comment
    Review of Political Economy, 2012
    Co-Authors: Fabio Ravagnani
    Abstract:

    This paper examines the critical remarks that D'Orlando (2005) addresses to the Classical Theory of value based on ‘normal’ positions, and briefly comments on the alternative dynamic analysis of short-run prices that he recommends. The first part refutes D'Orlando's considerations about the method traditionally adopted in Classical analysis and discusses the claim that the characteristic structure of Classical Theory prevents consistent determination of the normal prices. The second part moves on to consider the basic elements of D'Orlando's proposed short-period analysis and argues that they are problematic on both theoretical and methodological grounds.

  • The Classical Theory of Normal Prices and the Analysis of Economic Changes: A Comment on D’Orlando
    2007
    Co-Authors: Fabio Ravagnani
    Abstract:

    This paper examines the critical remarks that D’Orlando (2005) addresses to the Classical Theory of value based on ‘normal’ positions and briefly comments on the alternative dynamic analysis of short-run prices that he recommends. In particular, the first part refutes D’Orlando’s considerations about the method traditionally adopted in Classical analysis and discusses the claim that the characteristic structure of Classical Theory prevents consistent determination of the normal prices. The second part moves on to consider the basic elements of D’Orlando proposed short-period analysis and argues that they appear problematic on both theoretical and methodological grounds.

  • The Classical Theory of Normal Prices and the Analysis of Economic Changes: A Comment on D'Orlando
    2007
    Co-Authors: Fabio Ravagnani
    Abstract:

    This paper examines the critical remarks that D'Orlando (Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 2005) addresses to the Classical Theory of value based on 'normal' positions and briefly comments on the alternative dynamic analysis of short-run prices that he recommends. In particular, the first part refutes D'Orlando's considerations about the method traditionally adopted in Classical analysis and discusses the claim that the characteristic structure of Classical Theory prevents consistent determination of the normal prices. The second part moves on to consider the basic elements of D'Orlando's proposed short-period analysis and argues that they appear problematic on both theoretical and methodological grounds

Vadim A. Markel - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

George Y. Panasyuk - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.