对比资本概念:再看哈耶克-凯恩斯之争

S. Horwitz
{"title":"对比资本概念:再看哈耶克-凯恩斯之争","authors":"S. Horwitz","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1801532","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although much of the debate between Hayek and Keynes is today portrayed in terms of policy differences, those are not the most fundamental divisions between their conceptions of economics. I argue that their economics diverges most significantly in how they understand the role of capital in a market economy, and how capital relates to issues of savings and investment. Specifically, Hayek’s Austrian conception of capital provides a very different, and very much disaggregated, vision of the market process that can help identify the flaws in Keynesian theory and policy. When capital is seen as reflective of human plans and where it is understood to have multiple but not an infinite number of uses, the economist is forced to consider the microeconomic foundations of macroeconomic phenomena in a way that validates Hayek’s complaint that Keynes’s aggregates conceal the fundamental mechanisms of change.","PeriodicalId":11754,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Other Macroeconomics: Aggregative Models (Topic)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Contrasting Concepts of Capital: Yet Another Look at the Hayek-Keynes Debate\",\"authors\":\"S. Horwitz\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.1801532\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Although much of the debate between Hayek and Keynes is today portrayed in terms of policy differences, those are not the most fundamental divisions between their conceptions of economics. I argue that their economics diverges most significantly in how they understand the role of capital in a market economy, and how capital relates to issues of savings and investment. Specifically, Hayek’s Austrian conception of capital provides a very different, and very much disaggregated, vision of the market process that can help identify the flaws in Keynesian theory and policy. When capital is seen as reflective of human plans and where it is understood to have multiple but not an infinite number of uses, the economist is forced to consider the microeconomic foundations of macroeconomic phenomena in a way that validates Hayek’s complaint that Keynes’s aggregates conceal the fundamental mechanisms of change.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11754,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ERN: Other Macroeconomics: Aggregative Models (Topic)\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2011-03-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ERN: Other Macroeconomics: Aggregative Models (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1801532\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Other Macroeconomics: Aggregative Models (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1801532","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

摘要

尽管哈耶克和凯恩斯之间的许多争论如今都被描述为政策分歧,但这并不是他们经济学概念之间最根本的分歧。我认为,他们的经济学在如何理解资本在市场经济中的作用,以及资本如何与储蓄和投资问题联系起来方面分歧最大。具体来说,哈耶克的奥地利资本观提供了一种非常不同的、非常分散的市场过程视角,有助于识别凯恩斯主义理论和政策的缺陷。当资本被视为人类计划的反映,并且被理解为有多种而不是无限的用途时,经济学家被迫考虑宏观经济现象的微观经济基础,以一种验证哈耶克的抱怨的方式,即凯恩斯的总量掩盖了变化的基本机制。
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
Contrasting Concepts of Capital: Yet Another Look at the Hayek-Keynes Debate
Although much of the debate between Hayek and Keynes is today portrayed in terms of policy differences, those are not the most fundamental divisions between their conceptions of economics. I argue that their economics diverges most significantly in how they understand the role of capital in a market economy, and how capital relates to issues of savings and investment. Specifically, Hayek’s Austrian conception of capital provides a very different, and very much disaggregated, vision of the market process that can help identify the flaws in Keynesian theory and policy. When capital is seen as reflective of human plans and where it is understood to have multiple but not an infinite number of uses, the economist is forced to consider the microeconomic foundations of macroeconomic phenomena in a way that validates Hayek’s complaint that Keynes’s aggregates conceal the fundamental mechanisms of change.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Economic Hysteresis and its Modeling Credit Horizons Estimation of Heuristic Switching in Behavioral Macroeconomic Models Coupled Climate-Economy-Ecology (CoCEB) Modeling: A Dynamic Approach Post Keynesian Economics Is Based on Joan Robinson’s Many Canards About Supposed Gaping Holes in Keynes’s Theory: The Real Problem Is Gaping Holes and Gross Ignorance in the Post Keynesian Understanding of Keynes’s a Treatise on Probability
×
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