PKT
mailing list archive

Other Periods  | Other mailing lists  | Search  ]

Date:  [ Previous  | Next  ]      Thread:  [ Previous  | Next  ]      Index:  [ Author  | Date  | Thread  ]

Re: Keynes and competition



Whenever perfect competition is discussed it is assumed the marketplace is
ideally a place of pure competition, as if the government had a monopoly
on all forms of cooperation. In fact a real economy consists of agents who
act cooperatively and competitively.  Incidentally, the prejudice that the
marketplace is a purely competitive environment makes all monopolies seem
undesirable or corrupt.

What is relevant for macro analysis is the quality of
price  signals  and income streams rather than concerns
about the state of competition, perfect or otherwise. Keynes was right that are
no degrees of perfect competition, but there are most certainly degrees of
signal quality as every communication engineer knows.

Just as government can undermine competitive  strategies and through
price fixing, government can  surely undermine cooperative strategies
through excessive deficit spending. There is a delay associated
with  the latter effect, but today we are now experiencing the effects of
past Keynesian spending.

Will this effect dissipate of its accord?
What to do?

Harry Veeder




On Mon, 21 May 2001 15:46:43 +0900,
Kazuhiro Kurose <kurose@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote,

... According
to them, the perfect competition means that the individual (not aggregate)
demand curve is flat, and then the capitalists expect that they could sell
the goods whatever they want. But there are no demand constraints in this
circumstance.

First, we would do well not to put words into Keynes mouth, especially when he already had a sufficient supply in there already. He claimed that his model applied whatever the degree of competition. However, under the model labelled perfect competition, there is a lot of extra stuff in there in addition to the degree of competition. So arguing about perfect competition in all its abstract "angels on the head of a pin" glory is somewhat beside the point. Pure competition is the competitive extreme that his claim applies to is pure competition -- he explicitly denies the feasibility of the kind of full information, for example, that perfect competition assumes. A shorthand for this argument is that having perfect information is no more a matter of degree than being pregnant, so perfect information is distinct from degree of competition.

Anyway, turn this "no demand constraint" argument around.
No matter what the costs of production, a sufficiently
strong increase in demand at the industry level will result,
under pure competition, in a market price that will justify
an increase in output -- either in the short run, or if not
then in the long run.  Therefore, you can conclude that
there is no supply constraint, only demand constraint.

Since you can use a similar argument to "prove" that
there is no demand constraint, only supply constraint,
all that is proved is that this style of argument is
flawed.  Either an increase in demand or a reduction
in costs at the industry level can result in an
increase in industry output under pure competition,
so both constraints are in place.

Whether there can or cannot be demand constraints
under perfect competition, as opposed to pure
competition, is entirely beside the point, as no
actual economy can have or approach perfect
competition, so the question would have no bearing
on whether or not there can be demand constraints
in the real world.

I think that the judgment on whether Keynes' system is
perfect competition or imperfect one depends upon the
judgment on whether there is disequilibrium in goods
market or not.

So, I'd say that Keynes' system aspires to be a model of real world economies, and therefore cannot be based on perfect competition, as the term is currently understood. However, it is compatible with pure competition or impure competition -- that is, does not depend upon the degree of competition -- and does not depend on a disequilibrium in goods market.

Virtually,

Bruce McFarling, Shortland, NSW
ecbm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx




Other Periods  | Other mailing lists  | Search  ]