Re: Full Employment

[Paul Davidson <pdavidson@xxxxxxx>]

At 12:22 PM 5/25/01 +0100, you wrote:
> From the thread  Re: Keynes and
> competition
> Paul Davidson wrote:
>
> > That is correct for the unemployed can always
> > be employed or self employed -- if money grows on trees (is reproducible)
> > -- then as long as the marginal utility of harvesting money from the
> > money tree exceeds the worker's marginal disutility of reaching up to
> > harvest the tree, then workers will  be employed or self employed
> > util the marginal utility of harvesting the last dollar equals the
> > marginal disutility of reaching up-- And this equality is the definition
> > of full employment.
>
>
> If you hold that money does not grow on trees, why do you advance this as
> a
> definition of full employment?
>
> You need to supply another definition of full employment (where
> there
> is no unemployment),  which is not dependent on money trees.


what is that Forrest Gump said that is relevant ot this last comment of
yours. 

My definition has nothing to do with money growing on trees!

Full employment is defined as when the marginal utility of the last unit
of labor employed just equals the marginal disutility of the last unit of
labor supplied.

Paul

Paul Davidson

Editor, JOURNAL OF POST KEYNESIAN ECONOMICS

Holly Chair of Excellence in Political Economy

Economics Department - University of Tennessee

523 SMC

Knoxville, Tennessee 37996-0550

work phone: (865) 974-4221

fax: (865) 974-4601/  (865) 974-1686

home phone and  fax: (865) 692-0802