Re: New vs. Post Keynesians

[ECWFM@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

one too readily assumes that it was the new keynesians (clower in this case)
who saw that the capitalist market might fail because, say, the unemployed
might like an array of consumer goods (according to their own consumption
plans) but could not signal these intentions (NOTIONS) to the firms because
they lacked the signalling means (CASH).

In fact, Marx said this in response to ricardo's claims (in agreement with say)
that general gluts were not possible because human needs are infinite. We might
tire of carrots but then we just shift to porsches. Marx said clearly that the
market only recognised demands which were backed with purchasing power. That
was of-course, the beginnings (IMHO) of modern macro - where demand-deficiency
impinges on the profit rate and quantity adjustments follow (unemployment).

It is also why I think the non-orthodox (read non-market clearing) economists
who are variously called post-keynesian owe more to marx than to keynes who was
after all a middle class apologist for capitalism.

the marx-kalecki line captured the notional-effective line before clower and
his lot "synthesised" it back into neoclassicana and before keynes claimed it
for his own general theory.

kind regards
bill mitchell - university of newcastle nsw australia
ecwfm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx