Keynes, Lucas and involuntary unemployment: a reply to Hayes
Michel De Vroey
Abstract
Michel De Vroey
Abstract
In this response to Mark Hayes's criticism of his article, ‘Lucas on involuntary unemployment’, the author insists on the need to draw a distinction between labour rationing (a market outcome) and unemployment (the activity of job seeking). Economic theory is mainly concerned with the former. Yet the issue of the voluntarity versus the involuntarity of unemployment pertains to unemployment as an activity. Failing to make this distinction cannot but lead to semantic confusion.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
In this response to Mark Hayes's criticism of his article, ‘Lucas on involuntary unemployment’, the author insists on the need to draw a distinction between labour rationing (a market outcome) and unemployment (the activity of job seeking). Economic theory is mainly concerned with the former. Yet the issue of the voluntarity versus the involuntarity of unemployment pertains to unemployment as an activity. Failing to make this distinction cannot but lead to semantic confusion.
Key concepts: Unemployment, Economics, Keynesian economics, Economic history, Psychoanalysis, Psychology, Macroeconomics