Monthly Archives: October 2021

The 2021 Nobel Prize, And Michał Kalecki On The Positive Effects Of Rise In Wages On Employment

Posted on by
Leave a reply

The Nobel Prize in economics this year was given in one half to David Card for his work for showing using “natural experiments” that “that increasing the minimum wage does not necessarily lead to fewer jobs”.

The profession has taken so much time to accept this. Also, many have pointed out that it’s not accurate and the prize press release itself indicates that it is for the experimental methodology and not much for the result.

At any rate, it is ridiculous that such a thing was known in the 1930s: Michał Kalecki wrote on it. The idea that increasing wages raises unemployment is an old dogma and so proving it wrong as some “credibility revolution” (as many economists claim) is a bit ridiculous.

Anyways, the point of my post is to highlight how Michał Kalecki had not only argued that increasing wages does not necessary have a negative effect, he went on to argue that it has a positive effect. He was arguing for wages in general, not just about a law on minimum wage, but the ideas are obviously similar: wages in general or the minimum wage.

The following are two quotes from 1939 and 1971 respectively. Correct me if I am wrong if someone had said this before him.

In Essays In The Theory Of Economic Fluctuations, 1939 in Collected Works Of Michał Kalecki, Vol. I:

Final remarks

1. There are certain ‘workers’ friends’ who try to persuade the working class to abandon the fight for wages in its own interest, of course. The usual argument used for this purpose is that the increase of wages causes unemployment, and is thus detrimental to the working class as a whole.

The Keynesian theory undermines the foundation of this argument. Our investigation above has shown that a wage increase may change employment in either direction, but that this change is unlikely to be important. A wage increase, however, affects to a certain extent the distribution of income: it tends to reduce the degree of monopoly and thus to raise real wages. On the other hand, ‘real’ capitalist incomes tend to fall off because of the relative shift of income from rentiers to corporations, which lowers capitalist propensity to consume.

In Class Struggle And The Distribution Of National Income, in Collected Works Of Michal Kalecki, Volume II. Capitalism: Economic Dynamics:

… a wage rise showing an increase in the power of the trade unions leads-contrary to the precepts of classical economics-to an increase in employment. Conversely, a fall in wages showing a weakening in their bargaining power leads to a decline in employment. The weakness of trade unions in a depression manifested in permitting wage cuts contributes to the deepening of unemployment rather than to relieving it.

If you find any quotes before these dates, please let me now. Could be from Michał Kalecki himself!

OECD’s ‘Understanding Financial Accounts’ On The Importance Of Stock-Flow Coherent Models

Posted on by
Leave a reply

International organisations such as the UN, IMF, OECD etc., publish some good guides on national accounts and the flow of funds. I just noticed that the 2017 edition of OECD’s book ‘Understanding Financial Accounts’ has a section in appreciation of stock-flow coherent (SFC) models with a history starting with the work of Morris Copeland.

From page 407-409:

  1. Uses of financial accounts and balance sheets in economic research

Financial accounts were first modelled by Morris A. Copeland …

…

The fall of financial accounts and balance sheets and the work of Godley

In the 1960s and the 1970s financial accounts were at the centre of economic analysis. From the mid-1980s until the 2007-09 economic and financial crisis, interest in financial accounts and balance sheets more or less vanished, for a number of reasons: a growing focus on the micro-economic foundations of macroeconomics; the increasing role of monetary and credit aggregates for the conduct of monetary policy that implied a lower focus on the entire financial system; trust in the self-correcting market mechanism through price adjustments, while considering quantities – both flows and stocks – less important; the rational expectation critique of Keynesian models; a growing inclination among economists to separate monetary and real phenomena; and the problems of achieving full international harmonisation of statistics until the introduction of the 1993 System of National Accounts (SNA93).

In contrast, Wynne Godley never abandoned the idea that economic models should be founded on flows and stocks, and developed consistent models of the US economy and other countries. In his approach, modern economies have an institutional structure comprising (non-financial) enterprises, banks, governments and households. The evolution of economies through time is dependent on the way these agents take decisions and interact with one another (Godley and Lavoie [2007]) …

…

References

…

Godley, W. and M. Lavoie (2007), Monetary Economics: An Integrated Approach to Money, Credit, Income, Production and Wealth, Palgrave MacMillan, Basingstoke.

…

Link

Marc Lavoie’s Lecture On Policy Response To The Pandemic From A Post-Keynesian Perspective

There’s a lecture (on Zoom) by Marc Lavoie hosted by Department of Economics at Kyungpook National University, from January this year which I only found recently.

The lecture is on some aspects of policies such as fiscal policy, large scale asset purchases by central banks (LSAP, or “QE”) during the pandemic and some comments on neochartalism or “MMT”. Basically distinguishing PKE and neochartalism.

Enjoy!

John Maynard Keynes On Import Controls

Posted on by
Leave a reply

I was rereading the article Keynes And The Management Of Real National Income And Expenditure by Wynne Godley from 1983 (page 157 in that book, footnote 20) and he reminds us of this letter from JMK published in The Collected Writings Of John Maynard Keynes, Volume XXVI, pages 287-289, that he thought that import controls work much better than movements in the exchange rates.

To J. M. FLEMING, 13 March 1944

Dear Fleming,

Your paper on quotas versus depreciation, sent me with your letter of February 14th, raises a very interesting question. But, for my own part, I am not one of the’ most economists’, to whom in paragraph 2 you attribute the view that disequilibrium ought, so far as possible, to be corrected by movements in the rate of exchange rather than by controls over commodity trade.

There is, first of all, to the contrary the simple-minded argument that, after all, restriction of imports does do the trick, whereas movements in the rate of exchange do not necessarily do so.

…