Print

Print


John, there are many, but I am in a rush, just wanted to remind you of the Cornwalls! I know you are an honorary Canadian, so there's n question you are familiar! :)

Mathew Forstater
Professor of Economics, UMKC
 & Research Director, 
Binzagr Institute  page2image544
for Sustainable Prosperity

From: AFEEMAIL List <[log in to unmask]> on behalf of "Henry, John" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply-To: AFEEMAIL List <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Friday, February 26, 2016 5:41 PM
To: AFEEMAIL List <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [AFEEMAIL] Growth Theory

Phil,

 

Thanks for these. Yes, the problem remains that of equilibrium, full employment assumptions. But, maybe something can be tweaked. My colleague is a pretty smart guy and know the Wynn Godley approach quite well (though it doesn't quite speak to what he's after.)

 

John

 

John F. Henry
Levy Economics Institute of Bard College
Annandale-on-Hudson
NY 12504
 

From: AFEEMAIL Discussion List [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Philip Pilkington [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Friday, February 26, 2016 5:08 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Growth Theory

Oh and the Thirlwall work is a long run theory of growth.

But again... Non-ergodicity... Do we trust this? 

On Friday, 26 February 2016, Philip Pilkington <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
The Cambridge growth theory should be able to generate it... in theory. But I've never seen it done. I think that stuff was dropped after Robinson's "History vs Equilibrium" work when methodology overruled long-term modelling.

But it wouldn't be hard to plug in some distribution figures from Piketty/Saez into a Cambridge equation. But would we good non-ergodic folks accept the result? Especially with that full employment assumption built in...

Beyond that there's Baduri-Marglin but that's just export led stuff.

On Friday, 26 February 2016, Henry, John <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

Colleagues,

 

I had a question from a Levy associate that I could not readily answer. Perhaps some of you can come to my assistance. Does anyone know of any heterodox types who work on non-neoclassical theories of growth from which long-term predictions can be generated? Most of the literature I know of in this area is either old or deals with sustainability. But, the issue addressed is to develop a reasonable counter to conventional theory(ies) that appears both more reasonable and also usable in forecasting.

 

Any takers? Many thanks in advance.

 

John

 

John F. Henry
Levy Economics Institute of Bard College
Annandale-on-Hudson
NY 12504
 


--
Philip Pilkington

Tel: 0044(0)7825371244



--
Philip Pilkington

Tel: 0044(0)7825371244