Minsky on the IS-LM obfuscation
6 Sep, 2014 at 17:54 | Posted in Economics | 5 CommentsThirty years ago — as a young research stipendiate in the U.S. — yours truly had the great pleasure and privelege of having Hyman Minsky as teacher. He was a great inspiration at the time. He still is.
The concepts which it is usual to ignore or deemphasize in interpreting Keynes — the cyclical perspective, the relations between investment and finance, and uncertainty, are the keys to an understanding of the full significance of his contribution …
The glib assumption made by Professor Hicks in his exposition of Keynes’s contribution that there is a simple, negatively sloped function, reflecting the productivity of increments to the stock of capital, that relates investment to the interest rate is a caricature of Keynes’s theory of investment … which relates the pace of investment not only to prospective yields but also to ongoing financial behavior …
The conclusion to our argument is that the missing step in the standard Keynesian theory was the explicit consideration of capitalist finance within a cyclical and speculative context. Once captalist finance is introduced and the development of cash flows … during the various states of the economy is explicitly examined, then the full power of the revolutionary insights and the alternative frame of analysis that Keynes developed becomes evident …
The greatness of The General Theory was that Keynes visualized [the imperfections of the monetary-financial system] as systematic rather than accidental or perhaps incidental attributes of capitalism … Only a theory that was explicitly cyclical and overtly financial was capable of being useful …
5 Comments
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and Comments feeds.
[…] “Lars Syll approvingly quotes Hyman Minsky denouncing IS-LM analysis as an “obfuscation” of Keynes; Brad […]
Pingback by Krugman, What Keynes Really Mean, and is Economics a Science? | Last Men and OverMen— 13 Apr, 2017 #
[…] Lars Syll approvingly quotes Hyman Minsky denouncing IS-LM analysis as an “obfuscation” of Keynes; Brad DeLong disagrees. As you might guess, so do I. […]
Pingback by Krugman on Minsky, IS-LM and Temporary Equilibrium | Uneasy Money— 22 Sep, 2014 #
[…] Lars Syll approvingly quotes Hyman Minsky denouncing IS-LM analysis as an “obfuscation” of Keynes; Brad DeLong disagrees. As you might guess, so do I. […]
Pingback by Krugman’s blog, 9/11/14 | Marion in Savannah— 12 Sep, 2014 #
in the 1980s in the Journal of Post Keynesian Economics I published an article by John Hicks entitled “IS LM an Explanation”.
Hicks , after reading my 1980s article on uncertainty and nonergodic economics wrote to me that he should have labeled himself as a nonergodic economist — and wanted to explain why ISLM was not a valid interpretation of Keynes.
Paul Davidson
Comment by paul davidson— 7 Sep, 2014 #
Let’s be fair, here. Hicks always believed that his reinterpretation was not what Keynes argued, but rather how a neoclassical economist could interpret Keynes.
Comment by Haroon Akram-Lodhi— 7 Sep, 2014 #