Search

While modeling macroeconomic interactions, post-Keynesians propose rationales to verbally motivate the choice of behavioral equations. This informal approach to microfoundation results in inconsistencies and fuzzy arguments. The rationales for different behavioral rules are mutually inconsistent, require strong and nontransparent assumptions, or refer to highly endogenous variables that are not part of the model. The postulated behavioral rules are invariant to endogenous changes in the microenvironment, whereas the rationales imply that they adjust endogenously. The prevailing assumption of purely backward-looking expectations is neither theoretically nor empirically satisfying. The article concludes that revisiting the issue of microfoundation within the post-Keynesian framework may be a rewarding line of research. Furthermore, post-Keynesians should be open to various microfoundations as long as models feature the core of post-Keynesian theory—the principle of effective demand. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]