Wage and Profit-Led Growth: The Limits to Neo-Kaleckian Models and a Kaldorian Proposal

Abstract

Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen:Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden.Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen.Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. Terms of use: Documents in Bucknell UniversitySeptember 2013 * The opinions here expressed are the authors' own and may not coincide with those of the institutions with which they are affiliated. A preliminary version of this paper was presented at the Eastern Economic Association Meetings in New York, May 9, 2013. We thank the participants for their comments.The Levy Economics Institute Working Paper Collection presents research in progress by Levy Institute scholars and conference participants. The purpose of the series is to disseminate ideas to and elicit comments from academics and professionals.Levy Economics Institute of Bard College, founded in 1986, is a nonprofit, nonpartisan, independently funded research organization devoted to public service. Through scholarship and economic research it generates viable, effective public policy responses to important economic problems that profoundly affect the quality of life in the United States and abroad. ABSTRACTWe argue that a fundamental difference between Post-Keynesian approaches to economic growth lies in their treatment of investment. Kaleckian-Robinsonian models postulate an investment function dependent on the accelerator and profitability. Some of these models rely on the importance of profitability, captured by the profit share, to make the case for profit-led growth. For their part, Kaldorian models place the emphasis on the accelerator. More important, investment is a derived demand; that is, it is ruled by the adjustment of capacity to exogenous demand, which, in turn, determines the normal level of capacity utilization.In our view, the Kaldorian approach is better equipped to deal with some of the issues relating income distribution to accumulation with effective demand in the long run. We develop a Kaldorian open-economy model to examine the conditions under which an increase in real wages can produce profit or wage-led growth, showing that the limit to a wage-led expansion is a binding external constraint. The role and limitations of wages as a determinant of growth are further examined through spectral techniques and cycle analysis for a subset of developed economies. The evidence indicates that real wages are positively related to growth, investment, and capacity utilization. It also highlights the role of finance in sustaining expansions, suggesting that debt-led growth should not be identified with profit-led growth.

Convergence Towards the Normal Rate of Capacity Utilization in Neo‐Kaleckian Models: The Role of Non‐Capacity Creating Autonomous Expenditures

“… Thus, adding to the confusion over terminology, Pérez‐Caldentey and Vernengo () refer to the Kaldorian tradition when discussing models based on induced investment and non‐capacity creating exogenous growth components such as Serrano's Sraffian supermultiplier analysis.…”

From restrained golden age to creeping platinum age: A periodization of Latin American development in the Robinsonian tradition

“…Note that the collapse of the Galloping Platinum Age, however, was ultimately brought about by the by Paul Krugman and Lance Taylor. For a more recent formalization see Pérez Caldentey and Vernengo (2013). double shock of higher international interest rates and lower commodity prices, which created the conditions for the Debt Crisis of the 1980s.…”

“…For a formal version of the accumulation model which inspires this taxonomy of Growth Ages see Pérez Caldentey andVernengo (2013).…”

Reflections on neo-Kaleckian growth regimes: a Marxian reproduction perspective

“…There are also a few scholars who notice the controversies that the Bhaduri-Marglin model encounters within the neo-Kaleckian school (Liu and Lu, 2016). As the most typical manifestation of such a controversy, Caldentey and Vernengo maintained that the corrections of the Rowthorn-Dutt model by the Bhaduri-Marglin model impaired the position of Keynes's theory of effective demand in the growth model and requested the post-Keynesian theory to make a clean break with the Bhaduri-Marglin model (Caldentey and Vernengo, 2013). Based on theoretical requirements, some scholars are more willing to refer to the Rowthorn-Dutt model and its directly derivative models as the "neo-Kaleckian models" and call the Bhaduri-Marglin model and its derived models as the "post-Kaleckian models" so as to differentiate them (Hein, 2017;Palley, 2017).…”