Comments on: Keynes or New-Keynesian: Why Not Teach Both?

By: Stijn

Stijn — Tue, 30 Mar 2021 17:55:56 +0000

The interesting thing in this regard has been the work of Joseph Stiglitz (and Paul Krugman in his informal writings, e.g. ), who dismiss price and wage rigidities as the explanatory factor of unemployment and e.g. low wages (Stiglitz does so explicitly: ).

So at this point, it seems people like Mankiw are holding the originally ‘new Keynesian fort’, but I am entirely unsure whether Stiglitz and Krugman can still be regarded as New Keynesians in this regard, as they stress the role of institutions, power, imperfect markets, behavioural economics (e.g. herd behaviour, with Stiglitz referring to Minsky) et cetera in their work (so at this point, I am unsure what the difference with Post-Keynesian and some ‘mainstream’ Keynesians still is, beyond the latter perhaps agreeing that microfoundations of some sort are desirable).

LikeLike

By: Keynes or New-Keynesian: Why Not Teach Both? – Macroscan

Keynes or New-Keynesian: Why Not Teach Both? – Macroscan — Thu, 23 Aug 2018 10:12:03 +0000

[…] as a subject proper came into existence with the writings of John Maynard Keynes[i]. There were debates during his time about how to characterise a capitalist economy, most of which […]

LikeLike

By: David Harold Chester

David Harold Chester — Wed, 27 Jun 2018 09:48:06 +0000

The IS-LM model is applicable to all of the many kinds of transactions within the macro-economy. It is not only about the use of money. So before teaching it to the undergraduates we should be examining all the possible kinds of these transactions. My paper SSRN 2865571 “Einstein’s Criterion Applied to Logical Macroeconomics Modeling” which is easily extracted from the internet, should be used in order to better envisage the Big Picture, first.

LikeLike