Macroeconomics of Keynesian and Marxian Inspirations: Toward A Synthesis
Macroeconomics of Keynesian and Marxian Inspirations: Toward A Synthesis
Macroeconomics of Keynesian and Marxian Inspirations: Toward A Synthesis
Gerard DUMENIL
and Dominique LEVY
CNRS
disequilibrium
behavior
(1) short-term equilibrium and its stability; and (2) long-term equilibrium and its stability.
We call historical term (or term of historical tendencies) a
further time horizon in which the historical trends of distribution and
technology, as well as the historical transformation of institutions, are
considered.
[1]
[3]
[2]
[4]
Historical term
(historical dynamics)
[5]
ch. 22.
Figure 1
92
88
84
80
76
72
68
64
..
..
.
.
.
... ..... . ...u.... ....
.. .
.. ...... ... .. .... u . . . ...... ...... ........
. . ... ..... .. ..... . .. ... ... ........ . ...... ..
..
. ..... .
. .. .... .. .. .
..
.
.
.. .. ..
.
... . u ... ... .
..
..... . ...
. ....
..
.
.
.
.
and
: 48.1 07.2 .
.....: 48.1 11.4
.....
....
..............
...
.. ..
..
.... .. ... ST
... .... .
.. .. ..
.
... .. .. ..
.... ... ..............
...... ... ... .........
.......
. . .... . .
.. ..
.. .. .. .. . ...
.. ...
......................... ....
.
... ... ... ... .... ............
....
.. .. . ... . ..
... .
.....
.... . .. LT..... ... ..
....
.
.. ...... . .. .. .. . .
...
... . ...................................................................................................................... . . . ................. . ..... . . ............ . . . . . . . . . . .......... . . . . . . ........ ....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. ...
..
....................... .. ... ..... ......... .... .. ...................................... ... ..... ...
.
. ..... .................... ....
.. .. ................ .. . .. .
............... .. ..
.
.. .....
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.. .
.. .. .. ....... ...
....
.. .. ...........................
... .
.... .. ........ ..
...
.. .. .. ..... ......................... ............... ....... ..................
....... ....
....
.. .. . .. ..
..
............. ... .
.. .. .. ... .... ..
..
.. ..
....
.. .. .. ..
.
.. ..
..... ......... ................................................... ....
..
.. .. ........
.. ..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
............... ................
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.. ..
......... .. ........
.
....
.. ...
.. ... .. ..
.
.
.
..... ............... ..
.
.
.
.. ..
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.. ..
.. .. .. ..
......
..... ..........
.... ..
.
.
.
.
.
.. ..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
... .. ..
.. .......... ..
.. ...
.. ... ....
.
.. ..
.. .. ..
...
.
..
.. ..
.... ....
..
.. ..
..
.. ...
.. ....
.. ..
.... ....
.. ...
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
....
.... ...
..
.. ..
.. ..
.. ..
.. .....
....
....
.. ..
.
......
.. ..
.. ....
....
..
.
.. ...
..
.
.. ..
....
...
.
.. ..
...
.. .
...
.
.. ..
.. ..
..
.. ..
....
.. ..
..
....
.. ..
..
...
.. ..
..
.
.. ..
..
.. ..
..
.. ..
..
....
....
..
...
..
.
..
1950
1960
LT
1970
ST
1980
1990
u (= u + u + u ):
Sequence of short term equilibria (= u + uLT ):
Sequence of long-term equilibria (= u): (
)
Average value of u before 1970: ( ......... )
2000
2010
( .... .... )
In this paper, we denote as business-cycle fluctuations the two latter categories of fluctuations above, the short-term and long-term
components. Interpretations are suggested in section 7.
A household, for example, can finance more than its income by drawing on its bank account; it can also use the money deposited at the
bank to pay back loans. And the converse will happen if demand is
inferior to income. The outcome of such monetary-credit flows is the
variation of the net debt (borrowing for short).
From the viewpoint of real flows, the variation of the net debt
of an economic agent is the difference between its total spendings
(consumption and investment) and its income. Equivalently, the opposite of the variation of the net debt is equal to financial savings,
as opposed to savings, the difference between income and spendings.
With the notation D for demand, Y for income, and N for the
net debt, one has:
Dt+1 = Yt + Nt+1
(1)
10
11
3.3 Co-determination
A central aspect of the postKeynesian analysis is the endogenous or accommodative character of the issuance of money. Lenders
(commercial banks for short) and central banks could only accommodate the demands for loans. Symmetrically, the opposite assumption concerning the exogenous character of money, in which monetary authorities determine the amount of credit and money, is harshly
criticized. We reject this dilemma. Money is neither endogenous nor
exogenous, but is co-determined a third viewpoint.
We call co-determination the general twofold principle stating that: (1) in the analysis of the formation of demand, real and
monetary variables must be simultaneously determined; and, (2) less
trivially, the actions of nonfinancial and financial agents are jointly
involved. The behavior of households responds to their eagerness to
buy, the level of their income, their monetary holdings, and the cost
at which funds can be borrowed. Lenders typically assess risks; they
can set an upper limit to the amounts borrowed or straightforwardly
deny lending; they also take account of their own capability to lend
and obtain refinancing on the interbank market, given the policies
of the central bank and the opportunity to refinance opened by the
securitization of loans; they are constrained by existing regulations;
but the profit motive stimulates their propensity to lend. The central
bank has multiple objectives such as managing the macroeconomy, in
particular taming inflationary pressures, ensuring the smooth functioning of financial institutions, and limiting the degrees of indebtedness and the risks of financial crisis. One lever in the conduct of
such policies is the modification of the interest rate at which banks
are refinanced, but various balance-sheet ratios and regulations are
also involved. The variations of net debts are the outcomes of such
mechanisms.
9. G. Dumenil, D. Levy, Capital Resurgent. Roots of the Neoliberal Revolution, Harvard: Harvard University Press (2004), Box 18.1.
12
The determination of the flows of new loans is traditionally approached as the confrontation of two functions, a (potentially vertical) supply curve for loans and a demand curve for borrowing. Conversely, we model the variation of the net debt as in equations 1 or 3
by a single function accounting for all aspects of monetary and credit
mechanisms, the co-determined monetary function, N = F . A
simple expression for F is, for example:
Ft+1 = + Yt Nt jt
(2)
13
14
(3)
15
16
17
18
investment when capacity utilization rates are large, they simultaneously initiate a return toward the normal use of productive capacities.
(This twofold behavior aims at the adjustment of productive capacities in line with demand.) For example, the decision to produce (the
determination of the capacity utilization rate) can be modeled as the
adjustment of ut in reaction to two disequilibria:
ut+1 = ut (st s) (ut u)
(4)
19
general level of prices account for dimension, and the centered (and
relative) variables, for proportions. The main results are as follows:
1. A Keynesian equilibrium prevails in the short term (with the equality between production and demand in each enterprise or industry),
and a Classical-Marxian equilibrium in the long term (with a normal
use of productive capacities and prices of production).
2. Within rather simple models, the characteristic polynomial of the
Jacobian matrix used in the study of stability conditions can be factorized into four factors corresponding to proportions and dimension,
respectively, in the short and in the long terms. Within more complex models, the factorization is not rigorously possible, only quasi
factorization (given the low values of a number of parameters).
3. An important result is that, in the short term as well as in the
long term, the conditions for stability in proportions appear to be easily met, while the conditions for stability in dimension can be easily
violated. This result points to the basic property of capitalist economies, which we denote as stability in proportions and instability in
dimension:
- Stable in proportions refers to the capability of capitalist markets to allocate capital in the long term, and determine outputs
in the short term, in various industries, in line with demand patterns. Potential buyers generally find what they seek on markets.
- Instability in dimension or, more rigorously, at the limit of
stability in dimension, points to a twofold propensity of capitalist macroeconomies to deviate from normal levels. This is, first,
manifest in the recurrence of overheatings and recessions (the
expression of the instability of short-term equilibrium). Second,
for more lasting periods of time, the average levels of output
around which short-term fluctuations are observed may stray at
a distance from normal levels (as defined by the historical trend).
4. General disequilibrium models allow for the interpretation of these
properties. The same mechanisms simultaneously account for stability in proportions and instability in dimension in the short term.
Involved is the swift capability of enterprises to react to the signals
manifesting a divergence between supply and demand (parameter
in equation 4). This prompt adjustment ensures the availability of
output or the limitation of the growth of inventories of unsold commodities, with favorable effects concerning proportions. But the vigor
of the same adjustment may entail cumulative movements of output,
upward or downward, the expression of instability in dimension.
20
These findings straightforwardly echo Marxs analysis in Capital. In the theory of competition in Volume III, Marx accounts for
the mechanisms leading to the allocation of capitals among industries
and the prevalence of prices ensuring in each industry an equalized
average profit rate, with corresponding prices and outputs. (Involved
is, actually, a gravitation process because of recurrent shocks of variegated nature.) Marx believed this mechanism is efficient in capitalism (that is, stability in proportions). Conversely, the general level
of output follows the characteristic pattern of the cycle of industry
(the business cycle), with recurrent departures into overheatings and
recessions (instability in dimension).
6 - A historical perspective
This section is devoted to the analysis of the historical transformations of stability conditions. A first aspect is the impact of
declining profit rates. A second aspect is the effect of the progress of
management and the development of monetary mechanims on macro
stability.
21
22
7 - Business-cycle fluctuations
This section provides intepretations of the fluctuations of the
capacity utilization rate as in Figure 1, in line with the analytical
framework introduced in the present study. The notion of fluctuation implies the reference to a given center around which the macroeconomy oscillates, abstraction being made of growth. In our models,
this center of gravitation is denoted as u and assumed constant over
time. The examination of the series of capacity utilization rates over
the more than seventy years in Figure 1 suggests fluctuations around
a constant value to 1970 (83.1% for the average 1948-1970) and, in the
subsequent decades, around a slowly declining trend. Thus, between
2003 and 2007, the figure estimates uHT at 77.7%. We do not believe
enterprises went on building capacities during several decades, while
they were not able to reach their target utilization rates. Thus, in the
downward trend of uHT , we see a decline of u not a growing negative
gap between such a target and the rates actually achieved.26
The following interpretations can be given of the observed patterns of fluctuations:
24. As in the Deregulation and Monetary Control Act of 1980. See G.
Dumenil, D. Levy, Crise et sortie de crise. Ordre et desordres neoliberaux,
Paris: Presses Universitaires de France (2000), box 18.5.
25. G. Dumenil, D. Levy, The Crisis of Neoliberalism, Cambridge: Harvard
University Press (2011), ch. 14.
26. The difficult assessment of capacity utilization rates over such long periods of time is clearly expressed in the definition of the variable itself: The
Federal Reserve Boards capacity indexes attempt to capture the concept
of sustainable maximum output the greatest level of output a plant can
maintain within the framework of a realistic work schedule, after factoring
in normal downtime and assuming sufficient availability of inputs to operate the capital in place (Capacity Utilization Explanatory Notes, Federal
Reserve, http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/g17/CapNotes.htm).
23
24
the late 1950s to the 1960s, the fight against inflation culminating in
the early 1980s, and the attempt to boost the U.S. macro trajectory
by a bold mortgage policy (and deregulation) prior to the current
crisis.
2. The short-term component. The sudden deviations of uCT around
the long-term fluctuation suggest quite specific patterns of variations:
- The 1950s and 1960s manifest the typical pattern of the stop
and go, in the context of still immature stabilizing procedures.
- One can, then, observe the occurrence of sharp departures upward and downward, with rapid a few quarters long transitions (for example, the dramatic two-quarter fall in 1974.)
- A closer examination reveals clusters of observations, when the
capacity utilization rate stabilizes (gravitates in a vicinity of
given positions): (1) close to the long-term component (as in
1963, 1984, and during the long boom); (2) for comparatively
higher positions, as in overheatings (as in 1979); and (3) for
comparatively lower positions as in the lasting recession of 20012002.
- The three broad cycles during the 1970s and early 1980s (the
period of declining profitability) are spectacular.
3. The circumstances (deregulation and the relaxation of lending
practices) that led to the subprime crisis in the United States. Concerning these latter years, the circumstances created by the duration
of the current structural crisis have a considerable impact on macro
mechanisms and disturb usual patterns. More time will be necessary
to provide reliable assessments. After the plateau of the capacity
utilization rate above the long-term component during the second
half of the 2000s prior to the recession, a new sharp plunge occurred,
followed by a still quite limited recovery.
25
Contents
1 - Main results and outline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2 - Common and distinct grounds . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.1 Disequilibrium microeconomics . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2.2 Toward the distinction between theoretical fields . . . 4
2.3 A taxonomy: Knitting Marxian and Keynesian perspectives 5
2.4 The components of the general level of activity . . . . 7
3 - Money and credit in the macroeconomy . . . . . . 8
3.1 The credit demand channel . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.2 Built-in instability in a credit economy . . . . . . . 10
3.3 Co-determination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.4 Modeling a monetary macroeconomy
. . . . . . . 12
4 - PostKeynesian views concerning money and credit
13
4.1 The financing of investment in Kaleckis framework . 13
4.2 Exogenous money, endogenous money, co-determination 14
4.3 Financing channels within postKeynesian models . . 15
5 - Articulating theoretical fields Vindicating...
. . 16
5.1 Production and investment . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5.2 Stability in proportions instability in dimension . . 18
6 - A historical perspective
. . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
6.1 Profit rates and stability conditions . . . . . . . . 20
6.2 The tendential instability thesis . . . . . . . . . . 21
7 - Business-cycle fluctuations . . . . . . . . . . . . 22