Sunday, June 19, 2011


  • Alejandro Nadal asks, "Whatever happened to stability analyisis?" (h/t: Brad DeLong).
  • A blogger with the pseudonym of "Lord Keynes" critiques Austrian Business Cycle Theory, based on Sraffa's demonstration of the non-uniqueness of the "natural" rate of interest in an intertemporal equilibrium.
  • Jayati Ghosh provides access, from here, to an essay surveying Michal Kalecki's contributions to development economics.


Alex M Thomas said...

Hi Robert,

A correction. Jayati Ghosh is a woman.


Lord Keynes said...


Thanks for linking to my post.
Out of interest, I wonder do you - as someone who has done good work critiquing ABCT - know if modern Austrians like

(1) M. Skousen in The Structure of Production (New York, 1990).

(5) Gerald P. O’Driscoll and Mario J. Rizzo in The Economics of Time and Ignorance (Oxford, UK, 1985), pp. 198–213.
(6) Roger Garrison in Time and Money: The Macroeconomics of Capital Structure (London and New York, 2000)

still use the Wicksellian natural interest concept?

If not, how do they define the natural rate?

Is Sraffa's critique still applicable to Roger Garrison's work?


Robert Vienneau said...

Thanks Alex. I made a correction.

LK, I'm working on a long comment on your blog.

Lord Keynes said...

Thanks for your comment.

Is you work criticing the natural rate in ERE in these artciles?:

Vienneau, R. L. 2006. “Some Fallacies of Austrian Economics,” September

Vienneau, R. L. 2010. “Some Capital-Theoretic Fallacies in Garrison’s Exposition of Austrian Business Cycle Theory,” September 4

dictateursanguinaire said...

I've just read Ghosh's obituary/overview of Kalecki on Monthly Review. Very well written for the neophyte/mostly autodidact-ic economist (e.g. moi)