ケインズ革命
「私は自分が、世界が経済問題について考える考え方を革命的に変える――たぶんいっぺんにではなく、今後十年くらいかけてでしょうが――本を書いていると思うのです」
――(ジョン・メイナード・ケインズ,
G.B. ショーへの手紙, 1935年 1 月 1 日)
「私が「古典派理論」と呼ぶものに強くこだわる人々は、私がまるでまちがっているという信念と、目新しいことは何も言っていないという信念の間で揺れ動くでしょう。そのどっちが正しいか、あるいは第三の選択肢が正しいのかを決めるのは、それ以外の人々です。」
――(ジョン・メイナード・ケインズ『一般理論』 1936: p.v (序文))
"There are also, I should admit, forces
which one might fairly well call automatic which operate under any normal monetary system
in the direction of restoring a long-run equilibrium between saving and investment. The
point which I cast into doubt - though the contrary is generally believed - is whether
these `automatic' forces will... tend to bring about not only an equilibrium between
saving and investment but also an optimum level of production."
――(ジョン・メイナード・ケインズ,
Collected Writings, Vol. 13, 1973: p.395)
"The impression of Keynes that one gains
[from the Keynesians] is that of a Delphic oracle, half-hidden in billowing fumes,
mouthing earth-shattering profundities whilst in a senseless trance -- an oracle revered
for his powers, to be sure, but not worthy of the same respect as that accorded to the
High Priests whose function it is to interpret the revelations."
――(Axel Leijonhufvud,
On Keynesian Economics and the Economics of Keynes, 1968: p.35)
"After the war, Keynes's theory was accepted
as a new orthodoxy without the old one being rethought. In modern text-books, the pendulum
still swings, tending toward its equilibrium point. Market forces allocate given
factors of production between different uses, investment is a sacrifice of present
consumption, and the rate of interest measures society's discount of the future. All the
slogans are repeated unchanged. How has this trick been worked?"
――(Joan Robinson,
1979, Collected Economic Papers, Vol. V, p.172)
"The "Keynesian revolution" went
off at half-cock...The equilibrists, therefore, did not know they were beaten; or
rather...they did not know that they had been challenged. They thought that what Keynes
had said could be absorbed into their equilibrium systems; all that was needed was that
the scope of their equilibrium systems should be extended. As we know, there has been a
lot of extension, a vast amount of extension; what I am saying is that it has never quite
got to the point....I must say that that diagram [IS-LM] is now much less popular with me
than I think it still is with many other people. It reduces the General Theory to
equilibrium economics; it is not really in time. That, of course, is why it has
done so well."
――(John Hicks,
"Time in Economics", in Evolution, Welfare and Time in Economics, 1976:
p,289-90)
| ホーム | 学者一覧 (ABC) | 学派あれこれ | 参考文献 | 原サイト (英語) |
| 連絡先 | 学者一覧 (50音) | トピック解説 | リンク | フレーム版 |
