A Comparison-Contrast of J. M. Keynes’ Mathematical Modeling Approach in the General Theory with some of his General Theory Interpreters, especially J.E. Meade

Michael Emmett Brady

History of Economics Review, 1996, vol. 25, issue 1, 129-158

Abstract: The analysis in this paper demonstrates that J M. Keynes’ original mathematical model, presented in Chapters 10, 20-21 of the General Theory, is superior, in terms of mathematical completeness and rigor, to any other model put forward since 1936 which purports to give a technical exposition of “What Keynes Meant”. This paper covers the mathematical models of Meade, Hicks, Harrod, Patinkin, and Barro-Grossman, as well as improved versions of the Meade model offered by Darity-Cottrell and Rappoport.

Date: 1996
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/10370196.1996.11733225 (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:taf:rherxx:v:25:y:1996:i:1:p:129-158

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/rher20

DOI: 10.1080/10370196.1996.11733225

Access Statistics for this article

History of Economics Review is currently edited by John Harry Bloch and John Hawkins

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