RE: [OPE] Chris Harman on the spectre of Keynesianism

Date: Wed May 21 2008 - 08:23:19 EDT

> Anyone knows that reported macroeconomic events impact on the prices of stocks, securities, currencies, and other assets. To > predict how asset values will develop in the future, requires an understanding of how the "whole" and the "parts" interact. So the 
> professional speculator cannot really escape from the need to understand what's behind macroeconomic trends.
Hi Jurriaan;
Well, obviously, the macro economy influences individual branches of production and  (often) vice versa, 
but that doesn't mean that economists working for hedge funds have any more of a clue about what is 
happening in the macro economy than economists working for states and think tanks.
> In reality, few governments have ever - for any length of time - pursued a purely Keynesian, or purely supplyside economic policy. 
There's some truth to that, but it's an interesting question to ask why.  A tentative thesis I would suggest
is that bourgeois politicians tend to be more pragmatic than ideological in the selection of economic 
policies. I.e. they are more interested in meeting specified goals than being wedded to a particular
ideology. A good example of this was the retreat away from monetarism that occurred during the
Reagan administration.  
> Probably it would be more accurate to say that "we are all post-Keynesians now".
What governments are pursuing Post-Keynesian macro policies now?
In solidarity, Jerry

ope mailing list

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat May 31 2008 - 00:00:04 EDT