2007Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooksRequires access

There Are Major Differences between Kalecki’s Theory of Employment and Keynes’s General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money

Paul Davidson

Open publisher page 21 citations

Abstract

Michal Kalecki came to Cambridge as Keynes was completing his General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money . Joan Robinson noted that “without any contact either way, Michal Kalecki had found the same solution. … The interesting thing is that two thinkers, from completely different political and intellectual starting points, should come to the same conclusion” (Turner, 1989, p. 63). The question I would like to explore in this chapter is whether these two geniuses, Kalecki and Keynes, not only independently discovered the principle of effective demand but also came to the identical explanation of why there was no automatic market mechanism to assure full employment whenever a decline in investment spending occurred in an entrepreneurial economy. This is not merely an exercise in the history of economic thought. I believe that understanding the differences in Kalecki’s and Keynes’s underlying analysis of the principle of effective demand is essential to comprehending how recent events, such as the East Asian currency crisis and the Russian debt default, affect unemployment in the global economy. In the final pages of this chapter, I shall suggest how Keynes’s analysis points to a solution for today’s recurrent currency crises and high global unemployment rates. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Michal Kalecki came to Cambridge as Keynes was completing his General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money . Joan Robinson noted that “without any contact either way, Michal Kalecki had found the same solution. … The interesting thing is that two thinkers, from completely different political and intellectual starting points, should come to the same conclusion” (Turner, 1989, p. 63). The question I would like to explore in this chapter is whether these two geniuses, Kalecki and Keynes, not only independently discovered the principle of effective demand but also came to the identical explanation of why there was no automatic market mechanism to assure full employment whenever a decline in investment spending occurred in an entrepreneurial economy. This is not merely an exercise in the history of economic thought. I believe that understanding the differences in Kalecki’s and Keynes’s underlying analysis of the principle of effective demand is essential to comprehending how recent events, such as the East Asian currency crisis and the Russian debt default, affect unemployment in the global economy. In the final pages of this chapter, I shall suggest how Keynes’s analysis points to a solution for today’s recurrent currency crises and high global unemployment rates. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 21 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

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

Michal Kalecki came to Cambridge as Keynes was completing his General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money . Joan Robinson noted that “without any contact either way, Michal Kalecki had found the same solution. … The interesting thing is that two thinkers, from completely different political and intellectual starting points, should come to the same conclusion” (Turner, 1989, p. 63). The question I would like to explore in this chapter is whether these two geniuses, Kalecki and Keynes, not only independently discovered the principle of effective demand but also came to the identical explanation of why there was no automatic market mechanism to assure full employment whenever a decline in investment spending occurred in an entrepreneurial economy. This is not merely an exercise in the history of economic thought. I believe that understanding the differences in Kalecki’s and Keynes’s underlying analysis of the principle of effective demand is essential to comprehending how recent events, such as the East Asian currency crisis and the Russian debt default, affect unemployment in the global economy. In the final pages of this chapter, I shall suggest how Keynes’s analysis points to a solution for today’s recurrent currency crises and high global unemployment rates. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Key concepts: Economics, Currency, Full employment, Keynesian economics, Unemployment, Genius, Debt, General theory

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
There Are Major Differences between Kalecki’s Theory of Employment and Keynes’s General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money — Research Paper | ScholarLens