非自愿失业:凯恩斯《通论》中缺失的部分*

IF 0.6 3区 经济学 Q4 ECONOMICS
M. D. Vroey
{"title":"非自愿失业:凯恩斯《通论》中缺失的部分*","authors":"M. D. Vroey","doi":"10.1080/10427719700000039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Using a retrospective methodology, my paper examines critically the insights on involuntary unemployment offered by Keynes in his General Theory. Keynes, it is argued, gave involuntary unemployment a modern micro-founded definition yet — quite opportunely, in view of the difficulty of the task—did not attempt to provide a direct microeconomic explanation of it Rather, his claim to the demonstration of its existence rests on an indirect argument, where involuntary unemployment emerges at the corollary of effective demand falling short of its full employment level. This justification is based on the more or less tacit assumption that involuntary unemployment and effective demand-deficiency are equivalent. This claim of equivalence, it will be argued, is wanting. Hence the view that involuntary unemployment may have been demonstrated through the proxy of demand-deficiency falls. My paper evaluates whether Keynes's other arguments in favour of involuntary unemployment are robust. Several alternative interpretations of his General TheoryChapter Two 'fundamental observation', focusing respectively on money illusion, adjustment flaws, and resistance to cuts in nominal wages, are discussed. Here also the verdict will be negative. The general conclusion then follows that no solid explanation for the existence of involuntary unemployment is to be found in theGeneral Theory.","PeriodicalId":51791,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of the History of Economic Thought","volume":"4 1","pages":"258-283"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"1997-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10427719700000039","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Involuntary unemployment: the missing piece in Keynes's General Theory *\",\"authors\":\"M. D. Vroey\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10427719700000039\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Using a retrospective methodology, my paper examines critically the insights on involuntary unemployment offered by Keynes in his General Theory. Keynes, it is argued, gave involuntary unemployment a modern micro-founded definition yet — quite opportunely, in view of the difficulty of the task—did not attempt to provide a direct microeconomic explanation of it Rather, his claim to the demonstration of its existence rests on an indirect argument, where involuntary unemployment emerges at the corollary of effective demand falling short of its full employment level. This justification is based on the more or less tacit assumption that involuntary unemployment and effective demand-deficiency are equivalent. This claim of equivalence, it will be argued, is wanting. Hence the view that involuntary unemployment may have been demonstrated through the proxy of demand-deficiency falls. My paper evaluates whether Keynes's other arguments in favour of involuntary unemployment are robust. Several alternative interpretations of his General TheoryChapter Two 'fundamental observation', focusing respectively on money illusion, adjustment flaws, and resistance to cuts in nominal wages, are discussed. Here also the verdict will be negative. The general conclusion then follows that no solid explanation for the existence of involuntary unemployment is to be found in theGeneral Theory.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51791,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of the History of Economic Thought\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"258-283\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"1997-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10427719700000039\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of the History of Economic Thought\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10427719700000039\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of the History of Economic Thought","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10427719700000039","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

我的论文采用回顾性的方法,批判性地考察了凯恩斯在《通论》中提出的关于非自愿失业的见解。有人认为,凯恩斯给了非自愿失业一个现代的微观定义,然而——考虑到这项任务的难度,很巧的是——他并没有试图为非自愿失业提供一个直接的微观经济学解释。相反,他对非自愿失业存在的论证建立在一个间接的论点上,即非自愿失业是在有效需求低于充分就业水平的必然结果下出现的。这一理由或多或少是基于一个默认的假设,即非自愿失业和有效需求不足是等同的。有人会说,这种对等的主张是欠缺的。因此,非自愿失业的观点可能已经通过需求不足的代理得到证明。我的论文评估了凯恩斯支持非自愿失业的其他论点是否站得住脚。本文讨论了对他的通论第二章“基本观察”的几种不同解释,分别关注货币幻觉、调整缺陷和对名义工资削减的抵制。这里的结论也是否定的。由此得出的一般性结论是,在通论中找不到对非自愿失业存在的可靠解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Involuntary unemployment: the missing piece in Keynes's General Theory *
Using a retrospective methodology, my paper examines critically the insights on involuntary unemployment offered by Keynes in his General Theory. Keynes, it is argued, gave involuntary unemployment a modern micro-founded definition yet — quite opportunely, in view of the difficulty of the task—did not attempt to provide a direct microeconomic explanation of it Rather, his claim to the demonstration of its existence rests on an indirect argument, where involuntary unemployment emerges at the corollary of effective demand falling short of its full employment level. This justification is based on the more or less tacit assumption that involuntary unemployment and effective demand-deficiency are equivalent. This claim of equivalence, it will be argued, is wanting. Hence the view that involuntary unemployment may have been demonstrated through the proxy of demand-deficiency falls. My paper evaluates whether Keynes's other arguments in favour of involuntary unemployment are robust. Several alternative interpretations of his General TheoryChapter Two 'fundamental observation', focusing respectively on money illusion, adjustment flaws, and resistance to cuts in nominal wages, are discussed. Here also the verdict will be negative. The general conclusion then follows that no solid explanation for the existence of involuntary unemployment is to be found in theGeneral Theory.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
28.60%
发文量
67
期刊介绍: The European Journal of the History of Economic Thought (EJHET), a peer-reviewed journal, has quickly established itself as a leading forum for lively discussion on a wide range of issues in the history of economic thought. With contributions from both established international scholars and younger academics, EJHET is entirely pluralist and non-partisan with regard to subjects and methodologies - it does not subscribe to any particular current of thought, nor relate to any one geographic zone. The Managing Editors and Editorial Board and Advisory Board members are drawn from throughout Europe and beyond, and are committed to encouraging scholars from around the world to contribute to international research and debate.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信