2002RePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsOpen access

Lucas on Involuntary Unemployment

Michel De Vroey

Open full text 0 citations

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to examine critically Lucas' arguments against Keynes's General Theory and in particular against Keynes's concept of involuntary unemployment. It comprises two main parts. In the first part of the paper, the author questions Lucas's claim that Keynes betrayed the equilibrium discipline by freeing himself from the postulates of optimising behaviour and market clearing. In the second part, Lucas' three arguments against the involuntary unemployment concept are discussed--first, that there is no rationale for drawing a distinction between two sorts of unemployment; second, that every economic outcome features the voluntary and the involuntary jointly; and third, that alternatives to unemployment are always present. Copyright 2004, Oxford University Press.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The aim of this paper is to examine critically Lucas' arguments against Keynes's General Theory and in particular against Keynes's concept of involuntary unemployment. It comprises two main parts. In the first part of the paper, the author questions Lucas's claim that Keynes betrayed the equilibrium discipline by freeing himself from the postulates of optimising behaviour and market clearing. In the second part, Lucas' three arguments against the involuntary unemployment concept are discussed--first, that there is no rationale for drawing a distinction between two sorts of unemployment; second, that every economic outcome features the voluntary and the involuntary jointly; and third, that alternatives to unemployment are always present. Copyright 2004, Oxford University Press.

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The aim of this paper is to examine critically Lucas' arguments against Keynes's General Theory and in particular against Keynes's concept of involuntary unemployment. It comprises two main parts. In the first part of the paper, the author questions Lucas's claim that Keynes betrayed the equilibrium discipline by freeing himself from the postulates of optimising behaviour and market clearing. In the second part, Lucas' three arguments against the involuntary unemployment concept are discussed--first, that there is no rationale for drawing a distinction between two sorts of unemployment; second, that every economic outcome features the voluntary and the involuntary jointly; and third, that alternatives to unemployment are always present. Copyright 2004, Oxford University Press.

Key concepts: Unemployment, Involuntary unemployment, Economics, Full employment, Market clearing, Keynesian economics, Outcome (game theory), Lucas critique

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Lucas on Involuntary Unemployment — Research Paper | ScholarLens