No abstract

This paper surveys current debates on the distributive cycle. The literature builds on R.M. Goodwin' s seminal 1967 chapter titled " A growth cycle." We review theoretical motivations for the distributive cycle, which, despite signif-icant differences, all imply that macroeconomic activity leads the labor share in a counter-clockwise cycle in the activity-labor share plane. Subsequently, we summarize and update evidence on the existence of a distributive cycle, with a focus on the post-war US macroeconomy. We analyze activity and labor share series and their interaction in the frequency domain, and also employ stan-dard vector autoregressions. Results confirm the distributive cycle for the US post-war period. We contextualize results vis-à-vis current debates: (1) we consider a financial cycle, to rebut the theoretical possibility of " pseudo-Goodwin" cycles, (2) demonstrate that a suppressed labor share and stagnation are com-patible with short run Goodwin cycles, and argue that this link presents the way forward for research on secular stagnation.

This study embeds paid and unpaid care work in a structuralist macroeconomic model. Care work is formally modeled as a gendered input into the market production process via its impact on the current and future labor force, with altruistic motivations determining both how much support people give one another and the economic effectiveness of that support. This study uses the model to distinguish between two types of economies-a "selfish" versus an "altruistic" economyand seeks to understand how different macroeconomic conditions and events play out in the two cases. Whether and how women and men share the financial and time costs of care condition the results of the comparison, with more equal sharing of care responsibilities making the "altruistic" case more likely.

Casualties from natural disasters may depend on the day of the week they strike. With data from the Spatial Hazard Events and Losses Database for the United States (SHELDUS), daily variation in hurricane and tornado casualties from 5,043 tornado and 2,455 hurricane time/place events is analyzed. Hurricane forecasts provide at-risk populations with considerable lead time. Such lead time allows strategic behavior in choosing protective measures under hurricane threat; opportunity costs in terms of lost income are higher during weekdays than during weekends. On the other hand, the lead time provided by tornadoes is near zero; hence tornados generate no opportunity costs. Tornado casualties are related to risk information flows, which are higher during workdays than during leisure periods, and are related to sheltering-in-place opportunities, which are better in permanent buildings like businesses and schools. Consistent with theoretical expectations, random effects negative binomial regression results indicate that tornado events occurring on the workdays of Monday through Thursday are significantly less lethal than tornados that occur on weekends. In direct contrast, and also consistent with theory, the expected count of hurricane casualties increases significantly with weekday occurrences. The policy implications of observed daily variation in tornado and hurricane events are considered.

This paper surveys the last two and a half decades of non‐neoclassical literature on endogenous technical change and the functional income distribution. We distinguish between classical‐Marxian and post‐Keynesian models, and analyze them under three different assumptions on the determinants of technical change: capital accumulation, income distribution, and labor market tightness. The balanced growth implications of alternative models are compared with neoclassical exogenous and endogenous growth theories. Despite the strong differences in the assumptions regarding the substitutability between capital and labor, the role of different classes in society, and whether or not productive factors are fully employed, the various alternative models can be classified in a way that highlights remarkable similarities with their neoclassical counterparts. Both neoclassical and alternative theories of endogenous growth: (i) have shown that long‐run growth is sensitive to investment decisions, and (ii) rely on a linear spillover from the stock of knowledge to the production of innovations. The comparison highlights the different channels emphasized by competing theories: saving behavior and market structure in the neoclassical theories, as opposed to income distribution, the state of the labor market, and investors' behavior in alternative theories.