Re: Minsky, FIH, and stability

[FAC_BROSSER@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

Another response to Paul Davidson:
     Just two points.  Once again, I would hope that you distinguish
between NK schools.  Clearly the more prominent Akerlof-Stiglitz
type, that does not even accept that "coordination failure" types
are NK, involves "ad hoc" constraints.
     The other is that probably there is no absolutely general
theory.  "Strong" NK models can generate Keynesian results, if
allowed the "ad hoc constraint" of nonlinearities in certain places
(and some these, such as investment response, were not clearly
identified by nineteenth century types, but probably originally by
the still unjustly ignored Kalecki in his 1935 _Econometrica_
article, prior to Keynes's great work) while relaxing what many
economists consider to be an "ad hoc constraint" of the fundamentalist
Keynesian model, namely non-rational expectations.  I happen to
agree with you that reality is non-ergodic.  But then it is also
nonlinear and full of Akerlofian informational asymmetries and short-
run wage and price rigidities.  NK models answer a Classical
criticism of Keynesian models, substituting, if you will, what might
be viewed as one "ad hoc constraint" for another.
     One person's "ad hoc constraint" is another's fundamental axiom
of reality.
Barkley Rosser