马克思,凯恩斯和未来的工作时间

IF 2 2区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS Cambridge Journal of Economics Pub Date : 2023-10-30 DOI:10.1093/cje/bead046
David A Spencer
{"title":"马克思,凯恩斯和未来的工作时间","authors":"David A Spencer","doi":"10.1093/cje/bead046","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This paper re-examines the different visions of the future of working time offered by Marx and Keynes. While Marx and Keynes differed radically on some fundamental matters, they agreed that society would benefit from reducing work time. The idea of society using technology to curtail work hours was a central aspect of their respective visions of a better future. The paper compares Marx’s and Keynes’s visions. It also considers the fate of their visions as well as their relevance for modern debates on the future of work. The conclusion is that a critical political economy can learn from the different ideas of Marx and Keynes in supporting the case for reducing work hours in the present.","PeriodicalId":48156,"journal":{"name":"Cambridge Journal of Economics","volume":"51 3","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Marx, Keynes and the future of working time\",\"authors\":\"David A Spencer\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/cje/bead046\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract This paper re-examines the different visions of the future of working time offered by Marx and Keynes. While Marx and Keynes differed radically on some fundamental matters, they agreed that society would benefit from reducing work time. The idea of society using technology to curtail work hours was a central aspect of their respective visions of a better future. The paper compares Marx’s and Keynes’s visions. It also considers the fate of their visions as well as their relevance for modern debates on the future of work. The conclusion is that a critical political economy can learn from the different ideas of Marx and Keynes in supporting the case for reducing work hours in the present.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48156,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cambridge Journal of Economics\",\"volume\":\"51 3\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cambridge Journal of Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/bead046\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cambridge Journal of Economics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/cje/bead046","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文重新审视了马克思和凯恩斯对未来工作时间的不同看法。虽然马克思和凯恩斯在一些基本问题上存在根本分歧,但他们都认为减少工作时间对社会有益。社会利用技术减少工作时间的想法是他们各自对更美好未来愿景的核心方面。本文比较了马克思和凯恩斯的观点。它还考虑了他们的愿景的命运,以及他们对未来工作的现代辩论的相关性。结论是,批判的政治经济学可以从马克思和凯恩斯的不同观点中学习,以支持当前减少工作时间的观点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Marx, Keynes and the future of working time
Abstract This paper re-examines the different visions of the future of working time offered by Marx and Keynes. While Marx and Keynes differed radically on some fundamental matters, they agreed that society would benefit from reducing work time. The idea of society using technology to curtail work hours was a central aspect of their respective visions of a better future. The paper compares Marx’s and Keynes’s visions. It also considers the fate of their visions as well as their relevance for modern debates on the future of work. The conclusion is that a critical political economy can learn from the different ideas of Marx and Keynes in supporting the case for reducing work hours in the present.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
5.00%
发文量
54
期刊介绍: The Cambridge Journal of Economics, founded in 1977 in the traditions of Marx, Keynes, Kalecki, Joan Robinson and Kaldor, provides a forum for theoretical, applied, policy and methodological research into social and economic issues. Its focus includes: •the organisation of social production and the distribution of its product •the causes and consequences of gender, ethnic, class and national inequities •inflation and unemployment •the changing forms and boundaries of markets and planning •uneven development and world market instability •globalisation and international integration.
期刊最新文献
Economic growth and the foreign sector: Peru 1821–2020 Asymmetrical, symmetrical and artifactual man: group size and cooperation in James Buchanan’s constitutional economics Polyarchy and societas: an extended continuum of discrete structural alternatives What politics does to the economic analysis of the employment relationship: a critical perspective on personnel economics Truth or coherence? How Adam Smith used philosophical sources to explain how paradigms change
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1