Neo-Keynesian direction in economic theory. Main directions of neo-Keynesianism
Subsequently, Keynesianism developed in line with adaptation to the needs of post-war economic development. The main interest was in the problems of economic growth and dynamics, as well as combating the inflationary consequences of Keynesian regulation recipes.
The Keynesian movement of the post-war period included: neo-Keynesians, post-Keynesians, new Keynesians and the neoclassical synthesis.
Neo-Keynesianism, represented by ROY HARROD, EVSEY DOMAR, E. HANSEN, J. CLARK, F. PERRU, dealt mainly with the problems of economic growth and economic dynamics. The goal was to ensure “dynamic equilibrium” (i.e., production without crises and unemployment, with high rates of development with full use of the means of production). The theory of economic growth was based on Keynesian categories - effective demand, consumption, savings, and the multiplier. The main attention was paid to the factors of economic growth. The accelerator principle was introduced - a value inverse to the multiplier and establishing a relationship between the increase in national income and the increase in investment. The action of the accelerator is explained by the fact that in a growing economy (i.e., in conditions of increasing national income), a favorable investment climate is created when the population has savings, and entrepreneurs have a desire to invest, since the capital productivity ratio is quite high. The growth of national income among neo-Keynesians is determined only by the rate of capital accumulation or investment - all other factors (such as employment growth, use of natural resources, etc.) are derivative (or secondary).
Thus, an important place in neo-Keynesian models of economic growth is occupied by the consideration of quantitative relationships between accumulation and consumption, the “multiplier-accelerator” system. The main factors of economic growth are considered to be investments (the rate of capital accumulation) and the capital intensity of production (the ratio of capital to output).
The Neo-Keynesian business cycle theory linked the theory of the multiplier and the accelerator. An increase in investment causes a large increase in national income (i.e., the multiplier model operates), an increased national income leads to an even greater increase in investment (accelerator model), increased investment leads to a general increase in national income, etc. The result is a model of the upward phase of the economic cycle.
The economy enters a downward phase due to the action of the basic psychological law of society—increasing income leads to a decrease in consumption, which reduces aggregate demand and production. As a result, the economy responds with the opposite effect of the multiplier and accelerator. A decrease in investment leads to a greater decrease in national income (multiplier model), which, in turn, leads to a decrease in investment (accelerator model), etc. The downward phase does not have a built-in mechanism for entering the upphase. Only government actions pursuing a stimulating fiscal policy can bring the economy out of a crisis state.
Based on the principles of the multiplier and accelerator, American Keynesians developed a scheme for continuous economic growth, the starting point of which is government investment. They called the state budget a “built-in stabilizer” designed to automatically respond to cyclical fluctuations and soften them. Built-in stabilizers also include income tax, social security payments, unemployment benefits, etc. According to HANSEN, the total amount of taxes will increase during booms and decrease during crises. State payments, on the contrary, increase during crises and decrease during recovery. Thus, the size of effective demand is automatically stabilized.
E. HANSEN, EVSEI DOMAR and ROY HARROD created theories of economic growth, the central problem of which is the problem of implementation. According to these theories, the economy will be in a state of dynamic equilibrium if the movement of demand contributes to the full use of productive resources. The growth of national income, on which demand depends, is, in their opinion, only a function of capital accumulation, and the demand for capital is determined only by the growth rate of national income.
NEO-KEYNSIANS noticed a tendency for capital intensity to increase during industrialization and decrease during the period of a “mature economy”.
The excess of savings over investment in the economy leads to underutilization of enterprises and unemployment. The excess of investment demand over savings causes prices to rise.
Cycle models were developed that put demand issues first. DOMAR and HARROD considered economic growth depending on only one factor - capital accumulation. All other factors are factors that increase employment. The HARROD-DOMARA model is a tool for the problem of economic growth in the long term. The larger the net investment, the larger the investment, and therefore the higher the growth rate. The higher the capital intensity, the lower the economic growth rate. Using these data, it is possible to predict the expected rates of economic growth for the future. At high rates of economic growth, the capital intensity ratio will “spur” this growth. In conditions of depression and declining growth rates, there will not be enough investment to maintain the desired pace of investment. The model will suggest the necessary conditions for maintaining constant and relatively uniform growth over a long period.
Neo-Keynesians developed measures of indirect and direct regulation of the economy. Methods of indirect influence include tax policy, budget financing, credit policy, accelerated depreciation. These methods are called automatic stabilizers, credit stabilizers, institutional stabilizers, etc.
POST-KEYNESIANism appeared in the 70s, during the crisis of the Keynesian paradigm of economic thought, and was a peculiar mixture of left Keynesianism, institutionalism and even Marxism. Post-Keynesianism arose from the merger of two streams. On the one hand, this is left Keynesianism in Great Britain, i.e. associates of Keynes. Representatives of the direction of left Keynesianism are J. ROBINSON, P. SRAFFA, KALDOR and others. On the other hand, these are representatives of the criticism, revaluation and revision of Keynesianism (which began in the USA), who criticized his theory of “equilibrium with part-time employment” - this is R. KLOUER, P. DAVIDSON, H. MINSKY, et al.
Post-Keynesianism paid special attention to the problems of distribution that would satisfy both workers and capitalists and ensure economic growth.
The distribution of modern share capital was seen by post-Keynesians as a factor in the erasure of class differences. Therefore, workers need to increase their savings and invest them in the corporate sector.
Post-Keynesians were also involved in compensating for the inflationary consequences of Keynesian regulation recipes. Thus, the theory of income policy assumed, in order to prevent the unfolding of cost inflation (the wage-price spiral), the conclusion of an agreement between the state, corporations and trade unions on linking wages to labor productivity (a ratio of 1: 3, 1: 2 was established, i.e. . wages grow by 1-2%, if only labor productivity increases by 2-3%). Until now, this indicator and the relationship between productivity growth and wage growth serve as a criterion when deciding on a contractionary monetary policy.
At the end of the 20th century. The post-Keynesian direction was also actively developed by representatives of “new Keynesianism”, such as J. TAYLOR, J. STIGLER and others, who tried to overcome the most important drawback of Keynesianism - the lack of development of its microeconomic foundations. New Keynesians recognize the processes of monopolization and imperfect information. Moreover, monopolization is explained by the heterogeneity and specificity of the goods produced, which have narrow markets. And the lack of information is explained by the presence of costs of obtaining it, as a result of which it ceases to be publicly available.
CONCLUSION: Many post-Keynesians, especially in the 1970s, advocated linking income policy with growth policy in general, including policies that determine the rate and composition of investment. And this even meant the use of “nationwide planning”, designed to give government regulation the coordination and long-term aspect it lacked. However, these ideas have lost popularity today and modern Keynesians defend mainly the need to continue the stabilization policy, mainly through the use of monetary instruments.
economic theory of modernity, named after its founder, J. Keynes, in which he considered the need for only periodic government intervention in the economy, which should be carried out only for employment and anti-crisis regulation. However, higher rates of economic development in the 50s. The 20th century in a number of industrial countries of the world and, above all, in the USA, Great Britain, Germany, Italy, France, required not periodic, but systematic state regulation. This point of view of economists was embodied in an economic theory that developed the views of J. Keynes, and therefore called neo-Keynesianism. The main problem of the economic concept of neo-Keynesianism is not only sustainability, but also the theory of economic growth. Representatives of neo-Keysianism Roy Forbes Harrod, J. Robinson, Evsey David Domar and others developed models of economic growth that, based on quantitative relationships, established reproduction parameters in specific economic situations. The merit of R. Harrod is the development of the “capital ratio,” which is defined as the ratio of the total capital used to the national income received in a certain period of time, i.e., the efficiency of capital use through indicators of national income. A significant contribution to the deepening of the theory of market economics and the theory of neo-Keynesianism was made by the English economist J. Robinson. Developing economic theory from a new perspective, she critically examined the theory of marginal productivity and its component - the theory of “perfect competition”. In contrast, she proposed the “theory of imperfect competition.” The concept of economic growth she proposed is an integral part of economic growth theory. Its negative attitude towards monopolization was manifested in the doctrine of monopsony. In general, the methods proposed by J. Robinson can be considered as compromise and mitigation, leading to economic renewal and reform of society. The American economist E. Domar outlined his views in the book “Essays on the Theory of Economic Growth” (1957). The main task of economic theory is to maximize the rate of economic development for full employment of the population. E. Domar attaches primary importance to psychological factors in economic processes. In the development models developed by E. Domar, the source of economic growth is the accumulation of capital, in which its owners are psychologically interested, and the population is psychologically interested in consumption. He considered measures of state regulation of the economy in the form of incentives to increase capital investment. For the optimal relationship between production growth and demand, he proposed an “equilibrium equation.”
7. Economic theories of neo-Keynesianism. Neoclassical synthesis
The main focus of neo-Keynesian research was dynamic macroeconomic analysis. The main achievements of the followers of J.M. Keynes were associated with the creation economic growth theories. Within the framework of these theories, three points are considered: 1) conditions of dynamic equilibrium; 2) long-term deviations from dynamic equilibrium; 3) short-term deviations from dynamic equilibrium. The beginning of these studies was laid by the English economist Roy Forbes Harrod (1900-1978) and the American Alvin Hansen (1887-1975). In 1936, Harrod’s first book, “The Economic Cycle,” was published, and in 1941, Hansen’s work, “Tax Policy and Economic Cycles,” was published. At the end of the 1940-50s. There are a number of works devoted to this issue. In 1948, R. Harrod’s second book, “Towards a Theory of Economic Dynamics,” and a number of articles by the American economist Evsey David Domar (1914-1998) were published. In 1951, a new book by E. Hansen, “Economic Cycles and National Income,” was published, and in 1957, E. Domar presented his main work, “Essays on the Theory of Economic Growth.”
The method on which the neo-Keynesian theories are based has characteristic features. On the one side, these features are determined by the development of the Keynesian tradition. The neo-Keynesian school also proceeds from the principle of disequilibrium of the market system. Unlike neoclassical cycle theories, who considered cyclical fluctuations as temporary deviations from the state of equilibrium, neo-Keynesians focus on nonequilibriumtrends leading the economy into a state of depression or boom. Moreover, the mechanism of returning to equilibrium seems to be very difficult, in contrast to the mechanism of deviation from it. In this regard, neo-Keynesians pay great attention to state intervention in order to prevent significant deviations in the market situation towards excessive growth or decline.
On the other side, in contrast to the theory of J.M. Keynes's neo-Keynesian theory is dynamic analysis. In Keynesian theory, reproduction was considered in static state, within the short term. His theories followers were study of long-term dynamic processes.
Another addition to Keynesian theory by modern economists is the replacement of the method of permanent regulation and direction of private and public investment by maneuvering method government spending in depending on economic conditions. Thus, during periods of economic growth, investments are limited, and during periods of slowdown or recession, they increase (despite the possible budget deficit).
Theories of economic growth . In the 1950s Some supporters of the basic ideas of the economic theory of Keynes and his followers on the issue of justifying the need and possibility of state regulation of the economy, took Keynesian ideas as a starting position for the development of new theories, the essence of which was to clarify and justify constant rate mechanism economic growth. As a result, the so-called neo-Keynesian growth theories , based on taking into account the “multiplier-accelerator” system and modeling economic dynamics using the relationship between accumulation and consumption.
The main representatives of these theories of economic growth in the United States were a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Evsey Domar and in England professor at Oxford University Roy Forbes Harrod. Their theories (models) are united by a common conclusion about the feasibility of a constant (sustainable) rate of economic growth as a decisive condition for dynamic equilibrium(progressive movement) of the economy, in which full use of production capacities and labor resources is achievable. Another provision of the Harrod-Domar model is the recognition of the premise of constancy in the long term of such parameters as the share of savings in income and the average efficiency of investment. And the third similarity is that both authors considered the achievement of dynamic equilibrium and constant growth not automatically possible, but the result of appropriate government policy, that is active government intervention in the economy.
The distinctive features in the models of E. Domar and R. Harrod are due only to some differences in the starting positions of the model. Thus, the basis of R. Harrod’s model is the idea of equality of investment and savings, and any deviation causes crises (unemployment and inflation), and in E. Domar’s model the equality of monetary income (demand) and production capacity (supply) is considered the starting point.
At the same time, both E. Domar and R. Harrod are united in their convictions about the effective role of investments in ensuring income growth, increasing production capacity, believing that income growth contributes to increased employment, which in turn prevents the occurrence of underutilization of enterprises and unemployment. This belief stems from the unconditional recognition by these authors of the Keynesian concept of dependence nature and dynamics of economic processes from proportions between investments and savings, namely: the rapid growth of the former is the reason for the increase in the price level, and the latter is the reason for the underutilization of enterprises and underemployment.
Representatives of the neo-Keynesian school pointed out that Keynes's concept does not take into account the reverse influence of income growth on the reproduction process. They explain this dependence on the basis of the acceleration principle. If Keynes based his theory on multiplier principle, which means that an increase in investment leads to a multiple increase in income, employment and consumption, then in the USA, in theory Alvin Hansen(1887-1975), an additional principle was put forward - accelerator principle , meaning that growth in income and consumer demand causes an accelerating increase in investment in production (an accelerator is an accelerator). The meaning of the addition is as follows: the equipment is used over a long period and wears out gradually and is replaced in parts. Therefore, a percentage increase in the demand for goods will cause an increase in the demand for investment in a larger volume to renew and expand production. This effect of income on investment was first described in 1909 by the French economist Albert Aftalion(1874-1956). Subsequently, this principle was developed in more detail by R. Harrod, an English economist John Hicks(1904-1989) and American economist Paul Samuelson(1915-2009). The coefficient that expresses the dependence of investment growth on income growth is called accelerator and has the form:
a = ∆I t / (Y t -1 -Y t -2), where ∆I t – stimulated investments caused by income growth; Y – income; t – time.
This coefficient serves as a quantitative expression of the “acceleration principle”, according to which, as noted above, each increase or decrease in income, demand or production causes (requires) a larger relative (percentage) increase or decrease in “induced” investments.
The basis of the latest theory of reproduction and economic cycle models in Western science is a combination of the “acceleration principle” and the “multiplier principle”. The result is a system of interacting forces: the “multiplier” causes an increase in income, employment and consumption, and the “accelerator” stimulates new investments, which re-set into motion the entire process of deploying the “multiplier”. According to Western economists, this “ supercumulative process“is capable of ensuring continuous, crisis-free growth of the capitalist economy, but subject to the implementation of an appropriate public spending policy. If this “super-cumulative process” is left to itself, that is, not regulated, then it will lead to a disruption of economic equilibrium.
The “accelerator” connected to the “multiplier” is presented in the form of J. Hicks’ income equation:
Y t =I t + (I-S)Y t + a
(Y t -1 -Y t -1), where I t – autonomous investments; (I-S) – share of consumption in national income or its growth.
Depending on the ratio of the multiplier (or the coefficient of propensity to consume) and the accelerator, the dynamics of national income (Y) or its increments can take on a uniform or cyclical character. Cyclic fluctuations occur at the ratio [(I-S) + a ] 2 < 4a . Thus, the accelerator principle is considered by Western economists as one of the main explanations for the causes of economic cycles.
French economists -Francois Perroux(1903-1987) and others considered Keynes’s position on regulating interest rates as a means of stimulating new investment unnecessary. Believing that it is corporations with a predominant share of state ownership that are the dominant and coordinating force of society, they focused on the use of indicative planning method economy as a determining means of influencing the unabated investment process. At the same time, indicative planning is recommended for the purpose of setting mandatory goals only for the public sector of the public economy and long-term achievable forecasts for the economy as a whole; An alternative to indicative planning, imperative planning is considered as directive, socialist and therefore considered unacceptable.
Neoclassical synthesis.Keynesianism occupied leading positions not only in economic policy, but also in economic science in the 1940-1960s. Macroeconomic theory was actively developing: various models of economic growth and the business cycle were created. Not only the recession phase, but also the recovery phase of the cycle were considered as a disequilibrium state of the economy. The mechanisms of the state's countercyclical policy, monetary and budgetary instruments to influence the economic situation were improved.
Neoclassical, which was significantly inferior in popularity to the Keynesian school, nevertheless continued to develop. One of the most important directions of this development was the rethinking of the ideas put forward by the Keynesians. Neoclassicism sought to adapt them to its theory. As a result, the so-called neoclassical synthesis (the most prominent representatives of this trend J. Hicks, P. Samuelson). His task was to present Keynesian theory as an integral part of neoclassical theory. Since neoclassical and Keynesian theories examine different states of the economy - the first considers the situation full employment, and the second underemployment, - such a synthesis is possible if Keynesian theory is considered as a “special case” of neoclassical theory, dedicated to the specific state of the economy under conditions of underemployment and unemployment. The practical recommendations of both schools are synthesized in the same way. If the economy is depressed, then Keynesian measures are applied. Once a state of full employment is achieved, the recipes proposed by the neoclassics come into force.
In parallel with the development of the marginalist movement (neoclassicalism and Keynesianism), institutional theory. The main topic that occupied economists of this trend in the 1940-1960s was scientific and technological progress and associated institutional changes in the economy: transformation of forms of ownership, change of economic power, changes in the activities of large corporations.
. N. developed in the 1st half of the 50s. under the influence of the deepening general crisis of capitalism (See General crisis of capitalism) A and the associated process of transition from monopoly to state-monopoly capitalism (See State-monopoly capitalism), scientific and technological revolution, economic competition between two world systems and the collapse of the colonial system of imperialism. In new historical conditions, when the problem of economic growth rates began to be viewed as a matter of life and death of capitalism, science could no longer, like the theory of J. M. Keynes, limit itself to considering primarily the so-called problems of anti-crisis economic policy. Therefore, N. focuses on the quantitative dependencies of expanded capitalist reproduction or, in I.’s terminology, on the problems of economic dynamics and economic growth, acting as the most important theoretical basis for the economic policy of state-monopoly capitalism. N. proceeds from the main premise of Keynesianism about the loss by capitalism of a spontaneous mechanism for restoring economic equilibrium and the need for this reason for state regulation of the capitalist economy. The peculiarity of N. in this regard is that, reflecting a more mature stage of development of state-monopoly capitalism, it advocates a systematic and direct, rather than sporadic and indirect, as in Keynes’s theory, influence of the bourgeois state on the capitalist economy. For the same reason, the main problems of the bourgeois concept of state regulation of the economy changed - a transition was made from the so-called employment theory, focusing on anti-crisis regulation of the economy, to economic growth theories (See Economic growth theories) , aiming to find ways to ensure sustainable rates of economic development of the capitalist system. N.'s methodology is characterized by a macroeconomic, national economic approach to the consideration of problems of reproduction, the use of so-called aggregate categories (National Income, Total Social Product , aggregate supply and demand, aggregate investment, etc.), which allows, on the one hand, to grasp some of the most general quantitative dependencies of the process of capitalist reproduction, and on the other hand, to avoid considering its class essence and antagonistic nature. Like Keynesianism, N. focuses primarily on the concrete economic quantitative dependencies of the simple labor process in its national economic aspect, abstracting, as a rule, from capitalist production relations or interpreting them in a vulgar apologetic way. Under the conditions of the scientific and technological revolution, N. is forced to abandon the abstraction characteristic of Keynesianism from changes in the productive forces of bourgeois society and introduce indicators of technological development into its analysis. Thus, R. Harrod developed the concept of the “capital coefficient,” which he interpreted as the ratio of the entire amount of capital used to national income for a certain period of time, i.e., as a kind of indicator of the “capital intensity” of a unit of national income. At the same time, N. raises the question of the types of technical progress, highlighting, on the one hand, technical progress leading to savings in living labor, and on the other, that which ensures savings in materialized labor in the means of production (in N.’s terminology, capital) . “Neutral” technical progress, considered as a typical phenomenon, is a type of technological development in which the tendencies to save labor and save capital are balanced, so that the quantitative ratio of labor and capital does not change, therefore, the organic structure of capital does not change. Meanwhile, the analysis shows that, despite all the contradictory nature of the factors affecting the dynamics of the organic structure of capital, its main tendency in the conditions of the modern scientific and technological revolution is a tendency towards growth. Complementing Keynes's theory of reproduction, including his theory of the Multiplier , N. put forward the theory Accelerator a. Based on a combination of these theories, N. interprets the expansion of capitalist reproduction not as a socio-economic process, but as a technical and economic process. Proponents of capitalism have developed specific formulas for expanded capitalist reproduction, the so-called model of economic growth, which, as a rule, do not represent the total movement of the components of the entire social product and capital, considered from the angle of their natural material and value structure. Typically, models of national economic growth capture only individual quantitative relationships of the reproduction process, mainly in its specific economic aspect. The neo-Keynesian concept of “economic growth” (accelerating investment in scientific research, new technology, infrastructure with the help of government funding, measures for structural restructuring of the economy, etc.) runs up against the limited purpose of capitalist production, the policy of limitation pursued by state-monopoly capitalism, and sometimes a decrease in the standard of living of the working masses (for example, the policy of “freezing” wages, increasing taxes on workers’ incomes; state regulation of prices, leading to increased prices, etc.). For this reason, neo-Keynesian measures of economic regulation have not and cannot save capitalism from its inherent contradictions. Moreover, the policy of “economic growth” led to deficit financing of the economy, inflation, an escalation of the trade war between capitalist countries, a currency crisis, environmental destruction, etc.Lit.: Harrod R.F., Towards a theory of economic dynamics, trans. from English, M., 1959; Hansen E., Economic cycles and national income, trans. from English, M., 1959; Tinberkhen Y., Bos H., Mathematical models of economic growth, trans. from English, M., 1967; Osadchaya I.M., Modern Keynesianism, M., 1971; Bourgeois economic theories and economic policies of imperialist countries, resp. ed. A. G. Mileikovsky, M., 1971.
V. S. Afanasyev.
Great Soviet Encyclopedia. - M.: Soviet Encyclopedia. 1969-1978 .
See what “Neo-Keynesianism” is in other dictionaries:
Neo-Keynesianism... Spelling dictionary-reference book
Neo-Keynesianism is a school of macroeconomic thought that developed in the post-war period based on the works of John Keynes. A group of economists (especially Franco Modigliani, John Hicks and Paul Samuelson contributed greatly) made an attempt... ... Wikipedia
Encyclopedia of Sociology
NEO-KEYNSIANism- a number of modern trends in economic thought, united by Keynes' theory as a methodological basis. The starting point in N. remains the central idea of Keynes’s theory that a spontaneously developing market economy is not an ideal system... ... Large economic dictionary
NEO-KEYNSIANism- English Neo Keynesianism; German Neokeynesianismus. The theory of economic regulation, which is a modification of Keynesianism in relation to new economics. conditions after the Second World War. The peculiarity of N. is that it stands for... ... Explanatory dictionary of sociology
John Maynard Keynes Keynesianism is a macroeconomic movement that developed as a reaction of economic theory to the Great Depression in the United States. The seminal work was John Maynard Keynes's General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money,... ... Wikipedia
Keynesianism- (Keynesianism) Keynesianism is the economic doctrine of regulated capitalism. The economic school of Keynesianism, the role and laws, development and theory, representatives of Keynesianism Contents >>>>>>>>>>> ... Investor Encyclopedia
- (USA) (United States of America, USA). I. General information The USA is a state in North America. Area 9.4 million km2. Population 216 million people. (1976, assessment). The capital is Washington. Administratively, the territory of the United States...
John Maynard Keynes- (John Maynard Keynes) Contents Contents 1. Biography of Keynes Personal and family life Education Career 2. Subject and method of studying Keynes Psychological inclinations of a person Basic psychological Concept of the multiplier 3. J.M. Keynes about ... ... Investor Encyclopedia
Bourgeois theory of state monopoly regulation of the capitalist economy. Used by bourgeois economists as a theoretical basis for the economic policy of capitalist states and as a means... ... Great Soviet Encyclopedia
KEYNESIANism- a system of reformist views that occupied a dominant position in Western economic thought in the 30-60s. XX century The Keynesian model of economic development has served as the basis for the economic policies of industrialized countries since the mid-1930s. It played an important role in the transformation of the capitalist economic system, in the formation in these countries of a modern mixed economy, in which government regulation effectively interacts with market mechanisms.
The English economist J.M. Keynes (1886-1943), in his main work “The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money,” defended a new approach to capitalism. He argued that the market mechanism by itself cannot ensure the full use of society's resources. For the normal functioning of the economy, government intervention and active fiscal and monetary policies are necessary. That's why they talk about the Keynesian revolution in economics.
Keynesian macroeconomic theory is based on the idea of government regulation of aggregate demand. By stimulating public and private investment, expanding the system of government orders, and increasing spending on social needs, it was intended to influence the dynamics of real production. Keynes showed that it is investment, not saving, that promotes the growth of production, which causes a subsequent increase in income and new savings. This is called the multiplier effect. Unlike his predecessors, Keynes considered the policy of increasing nominal wages to be one of the means of expanding effective demand and maintaining employment. The basis of the Keynesian model of economic development was the system of public finance: an increase in government spending, a progressive increase in taxation, and budget deficits.
Keynes’s ideas were further developed in the works of representatives of post-Keynesianism, both “orthodox” Keynesians (D. Hicks, E. Hansen, A. Leijonhufvud, etc.) and left-wing Keynesians (J. Robinson, P. Sraffa, etc.). The head of the American followers of Keynes, E. Hansen, laid the Keynesian multiplier coefficient as the basis for the theory of the business cycle. He concluded that by increasing expenses during periods of crisis decline in production and reducing them during periods of “overheating” of the economy, the state is able to smooth out cyclical fluctuations in production and employment.
Keynesianism introduced macroeconomic aggregate (aggregate) quantities and their quantitative relationships into scientific circulation. Thus, it gave impetus to the development of new branches of economic science, in particular econometrics.
NEO-KEYNSIANism- a school of macroeconomic thought that developed in the post-war period based on the works of J. M. Keynes. A group of economists (especially Franco Modigliani, John Hicks, and Paul Samuelson) attempted to interpret and formalize Keynes's teachings and synthesize them with neoclassical models of economics. Their work became known as the “neoclassical synthesis,” and it produced the models that formed the central ideas of neo-Keynesianism. Neo-Keynesianism flourished in the 1950s, 60s and 70s.
This is an economic theory that represents a modification of Keynesianism in the direction of an even more active, direct and systematic influence of the state on the economy, primarily in the form of maximum stimulation of effective consumer demand.
Neo-Keynesianism proceeds from the main premise of Keynesianism about the loss by capitalism of a spontaneous mechanism for restoring economic equilibrium and the need for this reason for state regulation of the capitalist economy. The peculiarity of neo-Keynesianism in this regard is that, reflecting a more mature stage of development of state-monopoly capitalism, it advocates a systematic and direct, rather than sporadic and indirect, as in Keynes’s theory, influence of the bourgeois state on the capitalist economy.
A transition was made from the so-called employment theory, which focuses on anti-crisis regulation of the economy, to theories of economic growth, which aim to find ways to ensure sustainable rates of economic development of the capitalist system. The methodology of neo-Keynesianism is characterized by a macroeconomic, national economic approach to the consideration of problems of reproduction, the use of so-called aggregate categories (national income, total social product, total supply and demand, total investments, etc.), which allows, on the one hand, to capture some of the most general quantitative dependencies of the process of capitalist reproduction, and on the other hand, to avoid considering its class essence and antagonistic nature.