This essay has two main objectives. Initially, I specify the relationship between neoclassical theory and the property rights regime on which that theory rests. In this portion of the argument I show that the property rights consistent with neoclassical theory are inconsistent with those of a monetary (or capitalist) economy-the economy the theory purports to explain. Further, I specify several contradictions in the theory itself when it attempts to examine rational resource allocation, money and the labor market. Secondly, I show that Keynes's General Theory rests on a fundamentally different foundation than that of neoclassicism. His views on money, the labor market, equilibrium, etc. are in radical opposition to those of orthodoxy. In addition, his theory does not share the same position on property rights. Because of these considerations, Keynes cannot be understood by those economists holding the neoclassical perspective.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 11 (1999) Issue (Month): 2 (April) Pages: 151-170 Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML
(with abstract),
plain text
(with abstract),
BibTeX,
RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite),
ReDIF
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Christopher F. Baum).
Related research
Keywords:
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.: