🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1993Jan12.001732.9038@samba.oit.unc.edu> Robert.Vienneau@launchpad.unc.edu (Robert Vienneau) writes:

|Sorry, David, but from my limited knowledge about it, "New Keynesian
|Economics" does not seem promising, judged from the standpoint of a
|formalization of a historically accurate interpretation of the General
|Theory. From what I understand, New Keynesians adopt rational
|expectations assumptions with the change that not all markets need
|clear. Instead "rationing" or some such assumption is introduced in some
|markets. This is still a model of perfect "certainty," as defined by
|Keynes.
|
[list deleted]

|  Axel Leijonhufvud, "On Keynesian Economics and the Economics of
|  Keynes," Oxford Univeristy Press, 1968. (Bad history, I claim.
|  Interesting economics in its own right. )
|

I liked his stuff, and his student Peter Howitt, who is probably a 
New-Keynesian. I liked his insistence that it is not wage rigidities
that make Keynes special. Many should read that book but don't. I
think his essential message was sound: that the absence of the
auctioneer and the dual decision hypothesis is enough to make
persistent inequlaity of plans.
-- 
"There is nothing in the marginal conditions that     
    distinguish a mountain from a mole hill"            
                      Kenneth Boulding                             

					All comments  are mine---(David Wright) 
						david@cats.ucsc.edu.