[ show plain text ]
In [OPE-L:2824] Riccardo wrote:
> P.S.: I guess there is something worthwhile in, at least: (i) the category
> of 'finance';
What specific concepts in Keynes related to the category of finance have
not been appreciated by Marxists (or anticipated by Marx)?
(Here I think the Post-Keynesians have gone a lot further than Keynes).
> (ii) the notion of 'liquidity preference';
Perhaps. Explain further.
> (iii) autonomous investment;
That gets us back to a rejection of Say's Law (which I noted in my last
post) , doesn't it?
> (iv) the priority of investment over saving;
Or do you mean consumption over saving since investment demand is viewed as
a derived demand in Keynesian theory, isn't it?
> (v) the consequent notion of effective demand.
If that's not in Marx, then how did Kalecki develop that concept? I
thought that Kalecki and Robinson (and perhaps Sraffa) were rather
explicit in acknowledging their inspiration from Marx. Of course, one
wouldn't have expected the same acknowledgment from Keynes.
I find it curious that you didn't mention the multiplier or the
accelerator.
I do agree that Marxists have not, in general, paid enough attention to
the role of *expectations* (perhaps for fear that they would be accused of
being "subjectivist").
I attribute the rest of your comments in this post to the effects of
indigestion (Parmesian cheese gone bad, perhaps?).
In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sun Apr 30 2000 - 19:59:44 EDT