{"title":"关于“工资主导与利润主导的需求机制:孰长孰短”的笔记","authors":"L. Rolim","doi":"10.4337/ROKE.2021.03.06","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aggregative and structural approaches are the main approaches used to investigate the US demand regime. They have reported mixed findings whereby the former tends to find profit-led results and the latter tends to find wage-led results. Blecker (2016) suggests that those conflicting findings can be explained, at least in part, by the different time dimensions captured by the two approaches. That is because the US economy tends to be profit-led in the short run and wage-led in the long run. This note discusses and extends Blecker's analysis. An alternative interpretation of the findings of studies using the structural approach is offered, suggesting that their conclusions rest on their handling of the short run. Specifically, the structural approach fails to find cointegration relations among integrated variables in most equations. That absence means it fails to pick up the stronger effect of the wage share on consumption in the long run, which is a key mechanism explaining different regimes across time horizons. The note concludes by briefly discussing other possible explanations for the conflicting results reported in the empirical literature.","PeriodicalId":45671,"journal":{"name":"Review of Keynesian Economics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A note on ‘Wage-led versus profit-led demand regimes: the long and the short of it’\",\"authors\":\"L. Rolim\",\"doi\":\"10.4337/ROKE.2021.03.06\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The aggregative and structural approaches are the main approaches used to investigate the US demand regime. They have reported mixed findings whereby the former tends to find profit-led results and the latter tends to find wage-led results. Blecker (2016) suggests that those conflicting findings can be explained, at least in part, by the different time dimensions captured by the two approaches. That is because the US economy tends to be profit-led in the short run and wage-led in the long run. This note discusses and extends Blecker's analysis. An alternative interpretation of the findings of studies using the structural approach is offered, suggesting that their conclusions rest on their handling of the short run. Specifically, the structural approach fails to find cointegration relations among integrated variables in most equations. That absence means it fails to pick up the stronger effect of the wage share on consumption in the long run, which is a key mechanism explaining different regimes across time horizons. The note concludes by briefly discussing other possible explanations for the conflicting results reported in the empirical literature.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45671,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of Keynesian Economics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of Keynesian Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4337/ROKE.2021.03.06\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"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":"Review of Keynesian Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/ROKE.2021.03.06","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
A note on ‘Wage-led versus profit-led demand regimes: the long and the short of it’
The aggregative and structural approaches are the main approaches used to investigate the US demand regime. They have reported mixed findings whereby the former tends to find profit-led results and the latter tends to find wage-led results. Blecker (2016) suggests that those conflicting findings can be explained, at least in part, by the different time dimensions captured by the two approaches. That is because the US economy tends to be profit-led in the short run and wage-led in the long run. This note discusses and extends Blecker's analysis. An alternative interpretation of the findings of studies using the structural approach is offered, suggesting that their conclusions rest on their handling of the short run. Specifically, the structural approach fails to find cointegration relations among integrated variables in most equations. That absence means it fails to pick up the stronger effect of the wage share on consumption in the long run, which is a key mechanism explaining different regimes across time horizons. The note concludes by briefly discussing other possible explanations for the conflicting results reported in the empirical literature.
期刊介绍:
The Review of Keynesian Economics (ROKE) is dedicated to the promotion of research in Keynesian economics. Not only does that include Keynesian ideas about macroeconomic theory and policy, it also extends to microeconomic and meso-economic analysis and relevant empirical and historical research. The journal provides a forum for developing and disseminating Keynesian ideas, and intends to encourage critical exchange with other macroeconomic paradigms. The journal is dedicated to the development of Keynesian theory and policy. In our view, Keynesian theory should hold a similar place in economics to that held by the theory of evolution in biology. Many individual economists still work within the Keynesian paradigm, but intellectual success demands institutional support that can leverage those individual efforts. The journal offers such support by providing a forum for developing and sharing Keynesian ideas. Not only does that include ideas about macroeconomic theory and policy, it also extends to microeconomic and meso-economic analysis and relevant empirical and historical research. We see a bright future for the Keynesian approach to macroeconomics and invite the economics profession to join us by subscribing to the journal and submitting manuscripts.