Reply to Alan Day Haight

Craig Medlen

Journal of Post Keynesian Economics, 2017, vol. 40, issue 4, 638-640

Abstract: Alan Day Haight is incorrect in understanding Piketty’s paradox as a “dynamic version” of Keynes’ paradox of thrift. Keynes’ paradox of thrift deals with equilibrium conditions relating to the flows of savings and investment. In contrast, the capital output ratio central to Piketty’s paradox deals with a stock (capital) relative to a flow (output). Balanced growth cannot be considered an “equilibrium” condition without specifying an adjustment mechanism whereby balanced growth is re-established when the capital-output ratio becomes unbalanced. As illustrated by the Harrod-Domar case this unbalancing can be particularly degenerative when idle capacity develops.

Date: 2017
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01603477.2017.1376588 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:mes:postke:v:40:y:2017:i:4:p:638-640

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/MPKE20

DOI: 10.1080/01603477.2017.1376588

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Journal of Post Keynesian Economics from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().