Search

This article examines Chapter 5 'Effective Demand and Employment' in Post-Keynesian Economics: New Foundations by Marc Lavoie. This chapter covers one of the most distinctive contributions of the post-Keynesians, and one of its most profound insights. Analysis of effective demand and employment is a crucial and distinct foundation of post-Keynesian economics. Identifying the determinants of the level of employment and output represent one of the most significant contributions of post-Keynesian analysis. This is in total contrast to mainstream theory, according to which the level of output and employment are determined in the labour market, with labour seen as just another commodity, and the wage rate playing the role of the price equating supply and demand for labour. For post-Keynesians, the main determinant of the level of output and employment is the level of effective demand rather than the wage rate. Their views on the labour markets, taking into account segmented labour markets and efficiency wages, are considered. The determinants of profits and the profit share play important roles in the determination of employment and output. It is argued that fiscal policy plays a vital role in economic stabilisation, and that the typical arguments regarding its limitations are incorrect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper celebrates the contributions to Keynesian theory of the late Brazilian economist Fernando Cardim de Carvalho (1953–2018). We use Carvalho's 12 refereed English-language papers on Keynesian theory — the first published in 1983, the last in 2016 — as a point of departure for reflecting on two questions confronting macroeconomists today. First, what is the work of the economist — in what does economic analysis consist? Second, in this post-crisis era, how might macroeconomics — and specifically Keynesian macroeconomics — be rebuilt? Carvalho's writings show that the work of the economist can be as much about understanding the raw elements of human behavior in the real world — what we will call the foundational level of analysis — as about constructing models depicting the momentum of economic systems incorporating these behaviors. Adopting this approach to the practice of theory leads to insights and frameworks that would be lost if macroeconomic theorizing were equated with formal model building: it will enrich exchanges among economists, deepen the conceptual roots of Post Keynesian macroeconomics, and facilitate interdisciplinary exchange. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]