Re: GT and microfoundations

[Greg Nowell <GN842@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Gosh, John, I wouldn't presume to speak for Keynesian scholars everywhere but I
should point out taht the noted reactionary Mancur Olson wrote in the ass end of
the Rise and Decline of Nations that "Keynesian Economics" ONLY makes sense in a
monpolistic environment!

"John M. Legge" wrote:

> I have just completed reading Keppler's Monopolistic Competition Theory in
> which the author traces the development of monopolistic competition theory
> from Sraffa's 1926 epitaph for perfect competition to Stigler's and
> Friedman's unchallenged rejection of monopolistic competition on essentially
> ideological grounds in the 1950s.
>
> Keppler makes the point that many of the Cambridge people behind the
> original developmnet of monopolistic competition theory were also associates
> of Keynes, and refocussed their efforts on macroeconomics after the
> pubklication of the GT, leaving Chamberlin to battle the University of
> Chicago on his own.
>
> On page 189 Keppler writes:
> ...although Keynesianism is still very much alive (albeit on the defense),
> it will continue to lack microfoundations as long as monopolistic
> compeittion is not taken into account.  Some research in this field is still
> active...
>
> Is this a fair statement of the position?
>
> JML

--
Gregory P. Nowell
Associate Professor
Department of Political Science, Milne 100
State University of New York
135 Western Ave.
Albany, New York 12222

Fax 518-442-5298