From: glevy@PRATT.EDU
Date: Sat Nov 26 2005 - 09:39:00 EST
> The point is that aggregate demand > is a concept which conveniently spirits away the differential propensity > of social classes to save and consume, in accordance with their incomes. Hi Juriaan: I guess the same thing could be said for other "aggregates", like aggregate spending, aggregate income, aggregate saving, etc. I don't think this means that aggregates are meaningless, but rather that if they are used then there should be a clear understanding of what they do and do not represent. GDP could also be thought of as an aggregate but that fact shouldn't prevent us from analysing GDP data *even while we recognize its limitations*. An additional comment re the excerpt above: Kalecki didn't spirit away the differential propensity of social classes to save and consume. I'm not sure that its fair to say about Keynes either. What do others on the list have to say about that question? Is there a significant difference here between Keynes and Kalecki? In solidarity, Jerry
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Nov 27 2005 - 00:00:02 EST